## Facts

- Jerome Westfield DeWald operated two political action committees during the 2000 presidential election and recount: “Friends for a Democratic White House” and “Swing States for a GOP White House.”
- DeWald served as “chief of staff” of both PACs and also formed an entity called “PAC Services” to provide services to them.
- The PACs solicited contributions by mail from individuals who had previously donated to the Bush or Gore presidential campaigns.
- Evidence indicated the donor lists were obtained from publicly available federal election disclosures that included a warning against use for solicitation purposes.
- The PACs raised approximately $700,000 through the solicitations.
- Three donor-victims testified that the solicitation letters implied affiliation with either the Bush campaign or the Gore campaign, leading them to believe their donations would go to those official campaigns.
- The donor-victims testified they would not have contributed had they understood the PACs were not affiliated with the presidential campaigns and that the funds would not go directly to them.
- Although the PACs made some political contributions, attempted donations to the Republican National Committee and to the Gore campaign were returned and not accepted.
- A jury convicted DeWald of false pretenses ($1,000–$20,000 and under $200), two counts of common-law fraud, and two counts of larceny by conversion ($20,000 or more); the trial court imposed concurrent sentences.
- DeWald appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and asserting instructional and trial errors.

## Issues

1. Whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational juror could find beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of false pretenses, common-law fraud, and larceny by conversion.
2. Whether implied or suggestive representations of campaign affiliation, coupled with donor testimony, could establish material misrepresentation and victim reliance for false pretenses and common-law fraud.
3. Whether using donated funds in a manner inconsistent with the represented purpose supported larceny by conversion where donors voluntarily transferred the funds.

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed all convictions and sentences.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable juror to find that DeWald knowingly made material misrepresentations with intent to defraud and that donors relied on those misrepresentations.
- The court concluded that the jury could treat the solicitations’ implied affiliation with the Bush or Gore campaigns as materially misleading, even absent an explicit false statement.
- The court held that larceny by conversion was supported because DeWald lawfully received the donations but could be found to have converted them by using them inconsistently with the purposes represented to donors.
- The court rejected DeWald’s additional claims concerning jury instructions and trial rulings.

## Legal Principles

- Sufficiency review asks whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a reasonable juror could find each element proved beyond a reasonable doubt; appellate courts do not reweigh evidence or reassess witness credibility.
- False pretenses under MCL 750.218 requires obtaining money or property by a knowingly false representation of a past or existing fact, made with intent to defraud, and relied upon by the victim.
- Common-law fraud under MCL 750.280 requires a material misrepresentation, knowledge of falsity (or reckless disregard), intent that the victim rely, actual reliance, and resulting damage.
- Larceny by conversion under MCL 750.362 may be proved where the defendant lawfully obtains possession of another’s property and then fraudulently converts it to the defendant’s own use or to a use inconsistent with the terms under which it was received.
- Material misrepresentation and reliance may be established through the overall presentation of solicitations and donor testimony about what they understood and why they contributed.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed DeWald’s fraud and conversion convictions arising from PAC fundraising where solicitations implied affiliation with presidential campaigns, donors testified they relied on that implication in giving money, and the funds were used inconsistently with the represented purpose; on appeal, the evidence was sufficient under the deferential standard of review.


People v. DeWald, 267 Mich. App. 365, 705 N.W.2d 167 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005)