11th Cir. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) O52

18 U.S.C. § 1344

It’s a Federal crime to carry out or attempt to carry out a scheme to defraud a

financial institution, or to get money or property owned or controlled by a financial

institution by using false pretenses, representations, or promises.

The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following

facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) the Defendant knowingly carried out or attempted to carry out a

scheme [to defraud a financial institution] [to get money, assets, or

other property from a financial institution] by using false or

fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises about a material

fact;

(2) the false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises were

material;

(3) the Defendant intended to defraud [the financial institution]

[someone]; and

(4) the financial institution was federally [insured] [chartered].

A “scheme to defraud” includes any plan or course of action intended to

deceive or cheat someone out of money or property by using false or fraudulent

pretenses, representations, or promises relating to a material fact.

A statement or representation is “false” or “fraudulent” if it is about a

material fact that the speaker knows is untrue or makes with reckless indifference

as to the truth and makes with intent to defraud. A statement or representation may

be “false” or “fraudulent” when it’s a half truth or effectively conceals a material

fact and is made with the intent to defraud.

A “material fact” is an important fact that a reasonable person would use to

decide whether to do or not do something. A fact is “material” if it has the capacity

or natural tendency to influence a person’s decision. It doesn’t matter whether the

decision-maker actually relied on the statement or knew or should have known that

the statement was false.

To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and with the specific

intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises to cause

loss or injury. Proving intent to deceive alone, without the intent to cause loss or

injury, is not sufficient to prove intent to defraud.

The Government doesn’t have to prove all the details alleged in the

indictment about the precise nature and purpose of the scheme. It also doesn’t have

to prove that the alleged scheme actually succeeded in defrauding anyone. What

must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt is that the Defendant knowingly

attempted or carried out a scheme substantially similar to the one alleged in the

indictment.