by TChris

It is all too rare for an appellate court to overturn a conviction on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Appellate judges normally defer to a jury's assessment of the evidence, even when the evidence is so skinny that reasonable minds would doubt the defendant's guilt.

Nonetheless, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed the money laundering conviction of realtor Michael Carucci, who was accused of helping Stephen Flemmi hide profits from criminal enterprises by buying a condo and equipment for a laundromat. There wasn't much doubt that Carucci helped Flemmi buy the property (as a realtor, that was his job) but the court considered the evidence "too thin" to prove that the money used to purchase the property came from gambling, extortion, or drug trafficking.

"The court of appeals decided today that it wasn't enough for the government to prove that a businessman had the misfortune of having a criminal as his client," said Martin Weinberg, Carucci's lawyer.

Carucci had been convicted of four additional money laundry counts that the district judge overturned. He was acquitted of 94 other counts. The court of appeals' ruling gives Carucci a complete victory, so he will serve no part of the ten month sentence that had been imposed.