Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

In the Courts

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
October 30, 2007

Crawford Violation Not Harmless in Securities Fraud Where Intent Is Paramount

In United States v. Becker, 06-1274-cr, 2007 WL 2669604, (2d Cir. Sept. 13, 2007), consistent with its holding in United States v. McClain, 377 F.3d 219, 221-22 (2d Cir. 2004), the Second Circuit held that admission of co-conspirator plea allocutions without the opportunity for cross examination violates a defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation right under the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). However, Becker is noteworthy because of the highlighted role that the willful requirement of securities fraud played in the court's harmless error standard analysis, and its ultimate decision to affirm the lower court's judgment vacating the conviction. The court's reasoning is also instructive in arguing the willful-intent element of securities fraud, and is an artful lesson in distinguishing securities fraud actions from general criminal precedent.

After being charged in 2002, Gregg Becker was convicted of securities fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud during a jury trial in the Southern District of New York. The case related to Becker's actions as a licensed securities broker at the Melville, Long Island, branch of Investor Associates ('IA'), in so-called 'boiler rooms,' and related allegations of deceptive sales tactics and providing misleading information to potential clients. The evidence at trial included recorded telephone conversations between Becker and potential clients, the live testimony of two other former IA brokers as cooperating witnesses, and three former customers. The government also 'read into evidence, over the defense's objections, the transcripts of eleven plea allocutions by former IA brokers who described their intentional participation in the fraudulent scheme.' Becker, at *2. The allocutions were largely identical in their detailed descriptions of specific practices, and 'broad statements concerning the pervasiveness of the fraud ' potentially implying that all IA brokers were knowing participants in the conspiracy.' Id. Becker was convicted and his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.