## Facts

- Federal prosecutors charged several defendants associated with a close-knit religious community in Rockland County, New York with an overarching conspiracy to defraud the United States and federal agencies.
- The indictment alleged coordinated, overlapping schemes to obtain millions of dollars through fraudulent applications and documentation across multiple federal programs.
- The schemes included obtaining federal student financial aid by enrolling individuals in a sham or nonexistent school and causing grants and aid to be disbursed based on false representations.
- The schemes also included obtaining housing subsidies and rent payments by misreporting income and disguising property ownership to qualify for or increase federal housing benefits.
- The indictment further alleged fraud involving Social Security benefits and small-business loans.
- After the district court denied pretrial dismissal motions, a jury convicted the defendants of conspiracy and multiple substantive offenses.
- On appeal, defendants argued the proof showed multiple unrelated conspiracies rather than the single conspiracy charged, and raised defendant-specific challenges including insufficiency of the evidence and constructive amendment of a substantive count.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court’s instructions on single versus multiple conspiracies permitted conviction for conspiracies other than the single conspiracy charged in the indictment.
2. Whether the trial evidence was sufficient to allow a rational jury to find a single overarching conspiracy and each defendant’s knowing participation beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. Whether the proof and instructions constructively amended the indictment (or, alternatively, created a prejudicial variance) by broadening the bases for conviction beyond the grand jury’s charges.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the judgments of conviction.
- The court held the jury instructions, read as a whole, properly required the jury to decide between a single conspiracy and multiple conspiracies and to acquit unless the conspiracy proven was the one charged.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for a rational juror to find a single agreement with a common purpose—illegally obtaining federal funds—implemented through interrelated schemes with overlapping participants.
- The court rejected constructive-amendment and variance arguments, concluding the trial stayed within the indictment’s core allegations and did not broaden the grounds for conviction.

## Legal Principles

- Whether conduct constitutes a single conspiracy or multiple conspiracies turns on the existence of a common agreement and objective, including the degree of overlap among participants and the interrelated nature of the schemes.
- Jury instructions are evaluated in their entirety; isolated phrases do not warrant reversal if the overall charge correctly requires conviction only for the conspiracy alleged in the indictment.
- A conviction must be upheld if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A constructive amendment occurs when trial proof or instructions broaden the possible bases for conviction beyond the indictment; if the prosecution’s case remains within the indictment’s core theory, there is no constructive amendment, and a variance requires a showing of prejudice.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit upheld conspiracy and fraud convictions arising from coordinated misuse of multiple federal benefit programs, concluding the jury was properly instructed on single versus multiple conspiracies, the evidence supported one overarching agreement with a shared objective, and the trial did not alter the indictment’s charged theory.


United States v. Berger, 224 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2000)