United States v. Ji Chaoqun, 107 F.4th 715 (7th Cir. 2024), is a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit concerning 18 U.S.C. § 951, a criminal statute that imposes fines and imprisonment on agents of foreign governments who fail to register as such with the U.S. Department of Justice. The court ruled that a jury does not need to unanimously decide which specific act a foreign agent committed when charged under the statute and that the legal commercial transaction exception in 18 U.S.C. § 951(d)(4) serves as an affirmative defense, not an element of the offense.
| United States v. Ji Chaochun | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit |
| Full case name | United States of America v. Ji Chaochun |
| Argued | APRIL 3, 2024 |
| Decided | July 10, 2024 |
| Citation | 107 F.4th 715 |
| Case history | |
| Prior history | Appeal from N.D. Ill. |
| Holding | |
| A jury need not unanimously decide which act a foreign agent committed when charged with violating 18 U.S.C. § 951 and the legal commercial transaction exception is an affirmative defense but not an element of the defense. | |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Amy J. St. Eve, Thomas Kirsch, John Z. Lee |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Amy J. St. Eve |
| Laws applied | |
| 18 U.S.C. § 951 | |
Background
editDistrict court ruling
editThe United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois held the trial in September 2022.[1] Evidence presented during the two-week trial showed that Ji had been recruited by the Chinese Ministry of State Security before leaving China and had engaged in various activities on its behalf, including purchasing background reports on U.S. scientists and attempting to infiltrate the U.S. Army Reserves.[1]
Ji argued that the legal commercial transaction exception in § 951(d)(4), which excludes "any person engaged in a legal commercial transaction" from the definition of a "foreign agent,"[2] applied to his case. However, the district court found that this exception only covered legal commercial relationships and that Ji's relationship with China extended beyond that of engaging in a legal commercial transaction.[3]
The jury found Ji guilty of failing to register as a foreign agent in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 951(a), along with other charges.[1][4] The court convicted him accordingly.[4]
In January 2023, the district court denied Ji's motions for a judgment of acquittal and for a new trial.[5] He was subsequently sentenced to 96 months in prison in January 2023.[6][7]
Circuit court ruling
editJi appealed the district court's conviction and sentencing to the Seventh Circuit. The case was argued on April 3, 2024. In July 2024, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence.[8][9]
On appeal, Ji argued that the government was required to prove he was not engaged in a legal commercial transaction as part of the 18 U.S.C. § 951(a) offense and that the jury should have been required to unanimously agree on the specific act he committed. Ji also challenged the district court's evidentiary and sentencing decisions.[8]
In its July 2024 decision, the Seventh Circuit held that a jury need not unanimously agree on which specific act was committed under § 951, stating that a § 951 violation does not turns on the nature of the act. "Instead, it turns on whether the action was taken on behalf of a foreign government and without prior notice to the United States."[9][8] The court concluded that the specific act taken on behalf of a foreign government under § 951 is a means, not an element, and therefore a jury need not unanimously decide which act the Ji performed to find him guilty.[8]
The Seventh Circuit further ruled that the legal commercial transaction exception in 18 U.S.C. § 951(d) is an affirmative defense rather than an element of the offense. The appellate court also found no errors in the district court's evidentiary rulings or its sentencing decisions.[8]
References
edit- ^ a b c Magnier, Mark (September 27, 2022). "Former Chicago graduate student Ji Chaoqun convicted of spying for China part of larger plan: analysts". South China Morning Post. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "18 U.S. Code § 951 - Agents of foreign governments". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "United States v. Chaoqun - order on motion in limine — Document #368". courtlistener.com. September 22, 2022. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ a b "Northern District of Illinois | Chinese National Convicted of Acting Within the United States as an Unregistered Agent of the People's Republic of China | United States Department of Justice". www.justice.gov. September 26, 2022. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "United States v. Chaoqun, 18 CR 611 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ Gan, Nectar (January 26, 2023). "Chinese engineer sentenced to 8 years in US prison for spying". CNN. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "Office of Public Affairs | Chinese National Sentenced to Eight Years for Acting within the United States as an Unregistered Agent of the People's Republic of China | United States Department of Justice". www.justice.gov. January 25, 2023. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ a b c d e "UNITED STATES v. CHAOQUN (2024)". findlaw.com. July 10, 2024. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ a b Barker, Holly (July 11, 2024). "Chinese Spy Can't Shake Criminal Conviction, Eight-Year Sentence". Bloomberg. Retrieved October 27, 2024.