Woman’s conviction affirmed in 2014 fake marriage case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed the conviction of a woman in a fake marriage case.

The Ninth Circuit judges determined that there was sufficient evidence to convict Xiaoying Tang and that U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona, who presided over the trial, did not err in refusing Tang instructions on materiality and marriage.

In their memorandum and opinion last week, the Ninth Circuit judges also ruled that the underlying statutory definition of marriage is not unconstitutionally vague.

Ninth Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan penned the opinion. Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas and Judge Mary H. Murguia concurred.

In January 2014, a federal jury found Tang, a native of China, guilty of three charges: conspiracy to defraud the U.S., visa fraud, and making a false statement.

Tang filed post-trial motions, but the court denied them.

In May 2014, Manglona sentenced Tang to two years of probation and ordered her to immediately report to an immigration official for removal.

Tang, through counsel Joseph E. Horey, appealed, asking the Ninth Circuit to reverse her conviction. Assistant U.S. attorney Garth Backe argued for the U.S. government’s opposition.

On appeal, Tang challenged the authority of the District Court to try her. She also asserted that there was not enough evidence connecting her to the false statement in an I-130 Form.

Tang argued that Manglona erred in refusing her instructions on materiality and marriage. She asserted that the underlying statute defining marriage is unconstitutionally vague and violates due process.

In affirming Tang’s conviction, the Ninth Circuit judges said that Tang’s challenge to the NMI District Court’s authority fails in light of U.S. Supreme Court precedent that has rejected challenges similar to hers.

The judges said they affirm what they previously stated in an unpublished memorandum: the NMI District Court was properly established by Congress under Article 4 and is empowered to hear federal criminal cases.

Despite Tang’s arguments, the judges said there is more than enough evidence from which the jury could have found that she knew of the misinformation in the application and that it was asserted under penalty of perjury.

On the statutory definition of marriage, the judges said Tang has not made a persuasive case for vagueness.

The judges said the evidence indicates that Tang and her boyfriend Shahadat Hossain (known as Chico) approached Jesse Dowai with the intent to evade immigration laws.