United States v. Reguer

Gabriel Reguer (defendant) received $59,800 in cash from the sale of a counterfeit book. Upon being informed by his bank that it would have to file a currency-transaction report (CTR) with the government for such a large single deposit, Reguer made multiple individual deposits below the $10,000 reporting trigger. In 1988, Reguer pleaded guilty to violating 31 U.S.C. §§ 5313 and 5322(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Reguer admitted that he structured his deposits to avoid the bank’s CTR requirement, but Reguer contended that he did not know that structuring was illegal. Per Reguer, he did not want the bank to file a CTR because he was afraid the government would think he was a drug dealer. Thereafter, the United States Supreme Court decided Ratzlaf v. United States, holding that a defendant was not guilty of the crime of structuring under 31 U.S.C. § 5324(3) unless the defendant knew that his conduct was illegal. Relying on Ratzlaff and reiterating his claim not to have known that structuring was illegal, Reguer petitioned to expunge his conviction. The United States responded that Ratzlaff interpreted § 5324(3), which prohibited willful structuring, whereas Reguer was convicted of willfully causing a bank to fail to file a CTR in violation of § 5313. Per the United States, conviction under § 5313 required only Reguer’s knowledge of and intent to avoid the CTR requirement. The United States further contested whether Reguer was entitled to rely on Ratzlaff.