Request for acquittal in marriage fraud denied

Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman issued an order Tuesday denying a man’s request that he be acquitted on a charge of soliciting for marriage fraud.

Wiseman said a careful reading of the law’s language and other jurisdictions’ concurring interpretations of their own solicitation statutes makes it clear that Munnah Miah’s argument is fatally flawed.

Wiseman said solicitation does not require that the person being solicited be actually culpable or guilty of the underlying crime.

The judge said there was enough evidence for a jury to identify Miah as the individual who committed the offense.

The issue is related to the case of Maria Aurelio Ray, Muhammad Saiful Islam, and Minto Minto, who were charged with one count of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and one count of solicitation. Ray, Minto, and Munnaf Miah were also charged with one count of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and one count of solicitation.

According to the charging information, Ray, Islam, and Minto unlawfully agreed in March 2007 that Islam would marry Alisilynn Mallens for the sole purpose of obtaining a labor or immigration benefit.

In March 2007, Ray, Miah, and Minto allegedly conspired that Miah would marry Severene Kosam for the purpose of obtaining a labor or immigration benefit.

In March 2007, Ray, Islam and Minto allegedly encouraged Kosam and Mallens to arrange the marriage of Islam and Mallens.

In the same period, Ray, Miah, and Minto allegedly encouraged Kosam to marry Miah.

Last May the jury found Ray guilty of two counts of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud, but acquitted her of two counts of solicitation.

In July, the jury found Miah guilty of soliciting for marriage fraud, but acquitted him on the charge of conspiring with other persons to commit marriage fraud.

Last month, Miah, through counsel Stephen Woodruff, filed a corrected motion for judgment of acquittal.

Woodruff argued the government did not present enough evidence showing Miah solicited Severene Kosam to commit marriage fraud because it is legally impossible for Miah to commit the offense of marriage fraud.

Woodruff cited that Kosam was only seeking monetary benefits rather than an immigration benefit, so it was legally impossible for Kosam to commit marriage fraud and therefore, it is legally impossible for defendant to be convicted of soliciting Kosam to commit such offense.

But Wiseman disagreed. He said it is inconsequential that Kosam could not have been charged with marriage fraud.

Wiseman said Miah solicited Kosam to participate in the crime.

“Therefore, it is unquestionable that Kosam, the solicitee, did not have to be legally capable of committing marriage fraud in order for defendant to be convicted of solicitation,” he said.