Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

defendantappealtrialverdictfelonyjury trialjury instructions
defendantappealtrial

Related Cases

United States v. Kizzee, 877 F.3d 650
View Case »
Harolds Stores, Inc. v. Dillard Dept. Stores, Inc., 82 F.3d 1533, 1996-1 Trade Cases P 71,390, 1995 Copr.L.Dec. P 27,514, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1608, 38 U.S.P.Q.2d 1609, 44 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 746
View Case »
Burkhart v. H.J. Heinz Co., 140 Ohio St.3d 429, 19 N.E.3d 877, 2014-Ohio-3766
View Case »
Kannankeril v. Terminix Intern., Inc., 128 F.3d 802, 28 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,219, 47 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1376, Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 15,089
View Case »
United States v. Collins, 409 F.Supp.3d 228
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

People v. Selivanov, 5 Cal.App.5th 726, 210 Cal.Rptr.3d 117, 337 Ed. Law Rep. 348, 16 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 12,172, 2016 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,403

Facts

Yevgeny Selivanov and Tatyana Berkovich founded Ivy Academia, a charter school, in 2003. Following a random audit by the Los Angeles Unified School District in 2006, several financial irregularities were discovered, leading to a 33-count information charging the defendants with various financial crimes. After a jury trial, both were convicted of felony embezzlement and misappropriation of public moneys, among other charges. They were granted a new trial on certain convictions, and both appealed the trial court's decisions.

Spouses Yevgeny 'Eugene' Selivanov and Tatyana Berkovich founded a charter school, Ivy Academia, in 2003. In 2006, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), which issued Ivy Academia's charter, conducted a random audit of the school's finances. The audit revealed several irregularities, prompting a further investigation that ultimately resulted in the filing of a 33-count information charging Selivanov and Berkovich with numerous financial crimes.

Issue

Did the trial court err in its jury instructions and findings regarding the nature of the funds involved in the embezzlement and misappropriation charges?

Whether the trial court erred in making a finding that the funds involved were public moneys within the meaning of section 514.

Rule

Analysis

The court found that the jury's conviction of the defendants for embezzlement was supported by substantial evidence, including unauthorized use of charter school credit cards for personal expenses. The trial court's failure to instruct the jury on whether the funds were public moneys was deemed harmless, as the jury would have likely reached the same conclusion regarding the nature of the funds. The court also noted that the defendants did not contest the provenance of the funds, which were tied to the charter school they managed.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions of Selivanov and Berkovich, concluding that the trial court's error regarding the public funds finding was harmless.

We conclude the trial court erred in making the public funds finding but affirm defendants' convictions because the error was harmless.

Who won?

The People prevailed in the appeal, as the Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions of Selivanov and Berkovich. The court found that the evidence supported the jury's findings of fraudulent intent and that the trial court's instructional errors did not affect the outcome of the trial. The court emphasized that the defendants' actions constituted embezzlement, and the jury's verdict was supported by substantial evidence.

The People prevailed in the appeal, as the Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions of Selivanov and Berkovich, concluding that the trial court's error regarding the public funds finding was harmless.

You must be