## Facts

- Federal prosecutors charged Robert Sarantos and Constantine Makris with participating in schemes to secure permanent residence for male Greek nationals by exploiting the immigration preference for spouses of U.S. citizens.
- The scheme involved arranging sham marriages between Greek aliens and U.S.-citizen Puerto Rican women in exchange for fees.
- After the marriages, visa petitions and related immigration paperwork were prepared and filed with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) stating, among other things, that the married couples were living together as husband and wife.
- Makris acted primarily as a marriage broker who located women willing to marry for payment and assisted in arranging the marriages.
- Sarantos acted as an expediter who helped arrange marriages and prepared, processed, and submitted immigration documents containing alleged misrepresentations about the bona fide nature of the marriages and cohabitation.
- After a 15-day jury trial in the Southern District of New York, Sarantos was convicted of multiple conspiracy counts (18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1001, 1546) and multiple aiding-and-abetting false statement counts (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 2); Makris was convicted on two conspiracy counts.
- The district court withdrew one substantive count against Sarantos and partially withdrew a conspiracy count as to Makris; the jury acquitted both defendants on one conspiracy count and convicted on the remaining submitted counts.
- Both defendants appealed, chiefly challenging aspects of the jury instructions.

## Issues

1. Whether the jury instructions correctly stated the law governing conspiracies to defraud the United States and to make false statements to the INS under 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1001, 1546, and aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2.
2. Whether the charge improperly allowed conviction without requiring proof that defendants knowingly caused or facilitated materially false factual statements to the INS (as opposed to mere improper motive for entering a legally valid marriage).

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the convictions.
- The court held the evidence supported findings that defendants knowingly participated in schemes involving materially false statements to the INS and conspiracies to interfere with lawful governmental functions through deceit.
- The court rejected claims of instructional error, concluding the charge required findings of knowledge of falsity and intent to deceive or defraud, and did not permit conviction merely because the marriages were arranged for immigration purposes.
- The court upheld Sarantos’s liability on substantive false-statement counts under an aiding-and-abetting theory based on his role in preparing and processing the false filings.

## Legal Principles

- A conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 requires proof of a knowing, material false statement (or use of a writing containing such a statement) within the jurisdiction of a federal agency.
- A conspiracy “to defraud the United States” under 18 U.S.C. § 371 includes agreements to obstruct or impair lawful governmental functions by deceit, coupled with at least one overt act in furtherance of the agreement.
- In immigration fraud prosecutions based on marriage-based benefits, criminal liability may rest on objectively false factual representations to immigration authorities (including false assertions of cohabitation or of a bona fide marital relationship), not merely on the parties’ private motives.
- Aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2 requires that a substantive offense was committed by someone and that the defendant knowingly associated with and participated in the venture with the purpose of making it succeed; facilitating preparation and submission of false filings can satisfy this standard.
- Jury instructions are adequate where they require the jury to find knowing falsity and the requisite intent, rather than allowing conviction based solely on the label “sham marriage.”

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit upheld convictions arising from a marriage-based immigration fraud scheme, concluding the jury was properly instructed to convict only upon finding knowing participation in conspiracies and knowing facilitation of materially false statements to the INS, including false representations about cohabitation and the bona fide nature of the marital relationship.


United States v. Sarantos, 455 F.2d 877 (2d Cir. 1972)