Skip to main content
Find a Lawyer
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Inzunza, No. 05-50902

By FindLaw Staff | Last updated on

In an honest services fraud prosecution involving two former San Diego City Council members, one defendant's convictions are affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err by basing the denial of defendant's motion for acquittal on the statements of co-conspirators; 2) there was sufficient evidence to find a quid pro quo relationship between defendant's promised actions and the political contributions at issue; and 3) private gain is not an element of honest services fraud.  The grant of the other defendant's motions for acquittal and new trial are also affirmed where the evidence did not permit a finding of a quid pro quo relationship beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to that defendant because there was neither an explicit promise nor a connection of a campaign promise to a contribution.

Read US v. Inzunza, No. 05-50902

Appellate Information

Argued June 3, 2008

Submitted August 26, 2009


Opinion by Judge Canby


For Appellant:

Demetra Lambros, Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Benjamin L. Coleman, Coleman & Balogh, LLP, San Diego, CA

Dennis P. Riordan, Riordan & Horgan, San Francisco, CA

Was this helpful?

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard