10th Cir. Crim. Pattern Jury Instr. 2.73

TO PROMOTE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY

18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(A)(i)

The defendant is charged in count ————— with a violation

of 18 U.S.C. section 1956(a)(1)(A)(i).

This law makes it a crime knowingly to use the proceeds of

specified unlawful activity to promote the carrying on of illegal

activity.

T o fi n d t h e d e f e n d a n t g u i l t y o f t h i s c r i m e , y o u m u s t b e

convinced that the government has proved each of the following

beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: the defendant [conducted] [attempted to conduct] a

financial transaction;

Second: the defendant knew that the property involved in the

[financial transaction] [attempted financial transaction]

represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity;

Third: the [financial transaction] [attempted financial

transaction] involved the proceeds of [specify unlawful activity

from 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7)]; and

Fourth : the defendant [conducted] [attempted to

conduct] the financial transaction with the intent to promote the

carrying on of [specify unlawful activity from 18 U.S.C.

§ 1956(c)(7)].

The term “conducts” includes initiating, concluding, or

participating in initiating or concluding, a transaction.

The term “financial transaction” means [select from the

following as appropriate]:

(A) a transaction that in any way or degree affects

interstate commerce, and that involves:

the movement of funds by wire or other means;

or

(i) one or more monetary instruments; or

(ii) the transfer of title to any real property, vehicle,

vessel, or aircraft; or

PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

223

(B) a transaction involving the use of a financial institution

that is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate

commerce in any way or degree.

The term “proceeds” means any property derived from or

obtained or retained, directly or indirectly, through specified

unlawful activity, including the gross receipts of such activity.

“Interstate commerce” means commerce or travel between the

states, territories or possessions of the United States, including

the District of Columbia. It is not necessary that the defendant

have intended or anticipated an effect on interstate commerce. All

that is necessary is that the natural and probable consequence of

the defendant’s acts did in fact affect interstate commerce,

however minimal that effect is.