## Facts

- Charles Yi, CEO of a real estate development company, oversaw a project involving a 204-unit condominium complex.
- Before purchase, Yi participated in a walk-through and stated he was certain the ceilings contained asbestos due to the building’s age; another attendee testified they avoided touching ceilings for the same reason.
- During due diligence, the seller provided environmental materials, including reports and an asbestos operations and maintenance plan indicating asbestos in the ceilings and addressing exposure control.
- A project manager testified he provided these materials to Yi, arranged for an internal summary to be prepared and delivered to Yi, and was directed by Yi to obtain a bid for asbestos removal.
- Yi received an asbestos abatement proposal (approximately $437,000) and rejected it as unnecessary; he later rejected a less costly proposal to cover ceilings with drywall.
- Contractors were hired to scrape and refinish ceilings without being told the ceilings contained asbestos and without proper notice or disposal precautions.
- Yi testified he did not read the environmental documents, believed testing showed no asbestos, relied on subordinates, and denied involvement in hiring the ceiling-scraping contractors.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court erred by giving (or formulating) a deliberate-ignorance (willful blindness) jury instruction.
2. Whether the sentencing enhancement for an offense creating a substantial likelihood of death or serious bodily injury was supported by clear and convincing evidence.
3. Whether the district court clearly erred in finding Yi was an organizer or leader for purposes of a role enhancement.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the conviction for conspiracy to violate the Clean Air Act.
- The court held the deliberate-ignorance instruction was properly given and properly worded based on the evidence.
- The court upheld the nine-level enhancement for substantial likelihood of death or serious bodily injury, finding the record met the clear-and-convincing standard.
- The court upheld the organizer/leader enhancement, finding no clear error in concluding Yi directed others and made key project decisions.

## Legal Principles

- A deliberate-ignorance instruction is permissible when the evidence would allow a jury to find the defendant was aware of a high probability of a fact and deliberately avoided confirming it.
- A significant Guidelines enhancement may require clear and convincing evidence when its effect on the sentence is especially large.
- Improper disturbance or removal of asbestos-containing material without required precautions can support a finding that the offense created a substantial likelihood of death or serious bodily injury.
- A defendant’s authority, decision-making control, and direction of subordinates can support an organizer/leader role enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit affirmed Yi’s Clean Air Act conspiracy conviction and sentence, concluding that the evidence supported a willful-blindness instruction and justified both the substantial-risk and organizer/leader sentencing enhancements.


United States v. Yi, 704 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013)