United States v. Ravee Suphunthuchat ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              OCT 18 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 09-50639
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                    D. C. 2:09-cr-0267-JFW
    v.
    RAVEE SUPHUNTHUCHAT, etc.                        MEMORANDUM *
    Defendant-Appellent.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted October 5, 2010 **
    Pasadena, California
    Before: FISHER and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and STROM, District Judge.***
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not
    precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for
    decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    ***
    The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, Senior United States District
    Judge for the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation.
    After a bench trial, the district court found defendant guilty of access device
    fraud, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 1029
    (a)(2). After the district court rejected
    defendant’s motion for a new trial, defendant appealed to this Court arguing there
    was insufficient evidence to support his conviction and that the district court erred
    in denying his motion for a new trial.
    When viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution,
    “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements” of access device
    fraud beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Nevils, 
    598 F.3d 1158
    , 1161
    (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc) (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 
    443 U.S. 307
    , 319 (1979))
    (internal quotation marks and emphasis omitted). The evidence viewed in the light
    most favorable to the prosecution establishes that defendant opened a postal box at
    a commercial mail receiving agency, received packages there containing items
    worth thousands of dollars bought with three different J.P. Morgan Chase Bank
    credit cards in July and August 2008, and gave some of these purchased items to
    his daughter to sell on eBay. Further, payments were made toward these credit
    card bills that were later returned unpaid for insufficient funds, consistent with a
    “bust-out” scheme to commit credit card fraud.
    A rational trier of fact could have found, based on this evidence, that
    defendant (1) knowingly and with intent to defraud , (2) used “one or more
    -2-
    unauthorized access devices during any one-year period,” (3) to obtain things of
    value totaling at least $1,000 or more during that period, and (4) affected interstate
    commerce with his conduct. 
    18 U.S.C. § 1029
    (a)(2). Although defendant argues
    there was evidence establishing he was employed by a man named Weerawat
    Rahamadprasert (“W.R.”) and W.R. was the person engaged in the access device
    fraud at issue, our job is simply to ask whether any rational trier of fact viewing the
    evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution could have made a finding
    of guilt. See Nevils, 
    598 F.3d at 1163-64
    . We are not to ask “whether a finder of
    fact could have construed the evidence produced at trial to support acquittal.” 
    Id.
    In this case, sufficient evidence exists to support the district court’s verdict.
    We further hold the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the
    motion for new trial. United States v. Moses, 
    496 F.3d 984
    , 987 (9th Cir. 2007)
    (standard of review).
    AFFIRMED.
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-50639

Judges: Fisher, Bybee, Strom

Filed Date: 10/18/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024