Convictions Based on Insurance Theft Affirmed

US v. Hillman, -- F.3d --, 2011 WL 2306227 (10th Cir. 6/13/11) - affirmance of defendant's convictions of several crimes re: a scheme carried out with his girlfriend to steal money from inactive annuity policies held by insurance co. for which she worked. Grand jury testimony characterizing matters as untruthful and illegal did not improperly influence the grand jury or invade the grand jury's deliberative processes because the challenged testimony was factual and explained the course of the investigation. Anyhow, if there were grand jury errors, the petit jury's guilty verdict mooted them.

AUSA's interview with girlfriend re: whether reference to "grandma's" trust was a code-word for the illegal scheme was not improper and was certainly not plain error. IRS Agent's testimony that defendant lied during an interview about the source of the money he received was an accurate repetition of what Hillman admitted during the course of that same interview and did not improperly invade the province of the petit jury.

The appellate court will not reverse conviction on basis of insufficient evidence supporting a deliberate ignorance instruction where there is sufficient unchallenged evidence of actual knowledge of the illegal nature of the fraudulent scheme.