United States v. Kelechi Ajoku ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                         SEP 23 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 11-50230
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01094-WDK-5
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    KELECHI AJOKU, aka Kelechi Ajouku,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    On Remand From The United States Supreme Court
    Argued and Submitted September 16, 2014
    San Francisco, California
    Before: GOODWIN, HAWKINS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    Kelechi Ajoku (“Ajoku”) was convicted of four counts of making a false
    statement relating to a health care benefit program under 18 U.S.C. § 1035. On
    appeal, Ajoku challenges the district court’s jury instruction on the statute’s
    “willfulness” mental state element. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
    we reverse and remand for a new trial.
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    As conceded by the government in its opposition brief to Ajoku’s petition for
    certiorari, the district court erred by giving an instruction on the element of
    “willfulness” that does not comply with Bryan v. United States. See 
    524 U.S. 184
    ,
    191-92 (1998) (“As a general matter, when used in the criminal context, a willful act
    is one undertaken with a bad purpose. In other words, in order to establish a willful
    violation of a statute, the Government must prove that the defendant acted with
    knowledge that his conduct was unlawful.” (footnote and internal quotation marks
    omitted)). It is thus undisputed that Ajoku’s jury received an erroneous instruction.
    We apply harmless-error analysis to cases involving improperly instructed
    juries on a single element of the offense. See Neder v. United States, 
    527 U.S. 1
    , 9-10
    (1999). On the record before us, we are unable to conclude that it is “clear beyond a
    reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found [Ajoku] guilty” of the charges
    had it been properly instructed. 
    Id. at 18.
    We therefore reverse and remand for a new
    trial or other proceedings consistent with this disposition.
    REVERSED AND REMANDED.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-50230

Judges: Goodwin, Hawkins, Wardlaw

Filed Date: 9/23/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024