US v. Wanda Perry
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cr-00262-NCT-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998594263].. [10-4678]
Appeal: 10-4678
Document: 46
Date Filed: 05/20/2011
Page: 1 of 4
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4678
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
WANDA DELORIS PERRY, a/k/a Wanda Denise Perry,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:09-cr-00262-NCT-1)
Submitted:
May 3, 2011
Decided:
May 20, 2011
Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Clark Fischer, RANDOLPH & FISCHER, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley E. Rand, United States Attorney,
Paul
A.
Weinman,
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 10-4678
Document: 46
Date Filed: 05/20/2011
Page: 2 of 4
PER CURIAM:
A
counts
of
grand
jury
willfully
indicted
and
Wanda
knowingly
Denise
make
a
Perry
on
materially
five
false
statement and representation to a department of the executive
branch, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2) (2006).
also
charged
with
one
count
of
stealing,
She was
purloining,
and
converting to her own use approximately $20,311 that belonged to
the United States.
The trial jury found Perry guilty of all six charges
in the indictment; she was sentenced to sixteen months in prison
and ordered to pay a $600 assessment and $20,311 in restitution.
Perry appeals her conviction, contending that the district court
erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal because
the misrepresentations she made were not material.
We affirm.
This court reviews the denial of a Rule 29 motion de
novo.
United States v. Alerre, 430 F.3d 681, 693 (4th Cir.
2005).
In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence following a
conviction, the court is to construe the evidence in the light
most favorable to the Government, assuming its credibility and
drawing all favorable inferences from it, and will sustain the
jury’s verdict if any rational trier of fact could have found
the essential elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable
doubt.
2005);
United States v. Collins, 412 F.3d 515, 519 (4th Cir.
United
States
v.
Lomax,
2
293
F.3d
701,
705
(4th
Cir.
Appeal: 10-4678
Document: 46
2002).
“If
Date Filed: 05/20/2011
there
is
substantial
Page: 3 of 4
evidence
to
support
the
verdict, after viewing all of the evidence and the inferences
therefrom in the light most favorable to the Government,” the
court must affirm.
(4th Cir. 1994).
credibility
resolved
United States v. Murphy, 35 F.3d 143, 148
Furthermore, this court “cannot make [its] own
determinations
all
Government.”
but
contradictions
must
in
assume
testimony
that
in
the
favor
jury
of
the
United States v. United Med. & Surgical Supply
Corp., 989 F.2d 1390, 1402 (4th Cir. 1993).
To prove a violation of § 1001, the Government
must establish that (1) the defendant made a false
statement to a governmental agency or concealed a fact
from it or used a false document knowing it to be
false, (2) the defendant acted knowingly or willfully,
and (3) the false statement or concealed fact was
material to a matter within the jurisdiction of the
agency.
United
States
(internal
v.
Ismail,
quotation
marks
97
F.3d
50,
omitted).
“A
60
fact
(4th
Cir.
about
a
1996)
matter
within an agency's jurisdiction is material under § 1001 if it
has a natural tendency to influence agency action or is capable
Ismail, 97 F.3d at 60 (internal
of influencing agency action.”
quotation marks omitted).
Moreover, “[t]here is no requirement
that the false statement actually influence or effect [sic] the
decision
making
process
of
a
department.”
quotation marks and alterations omitted).
3
Id.
(internal
Appeal: 10-4678
Document: 46
The
Date Filed: 05/20/2011
evidence
is
Page: 4 of 4
overwhelming
that
the
Housing
Authority of Winston-Salem, which administered a program that
resulted in the expenditure of federal funds, actually relied on
Perry’s
misrepresentations
to
award
significant
benefits to her to which she was not entitled.
financial
We accordingly
conclude that the district court properly denied the motion for
judgment of acquittal and affirm the judgment of the district
court.
legal
before
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
the
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?