United States v. Christopher Marshall

I concur in parts II.A, II.B, II.C, and II.D.2 of the majority’s well-reasoned and well-written decision. I write separately to explain more completely my concurrence in part II.D.l, and because I must respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding in part II.D.3 with respect to the money laundering counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(i). I agree with the facts and the law as set forth in the majority’s opinion; however, I disagree with their conclusion “no rational trier of fact could convict Marshall of violating § 1956(a)(l)(B)(i)” on the basis of the evidence presented at trial.

I.…