Intent to steal money

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343 require proof that a defendant intended both to deceive and to wrongfully obtain money or property - such that a jury instruction permitting conviction upon proof of either element alone omits an essential element of the offense — where the Fourth Circuit affirmed convictions on counts for which the government's own witness testified the invoices were reviewed before payment, agreed upon, and not fraudulent or false, and the government separately conceded the same invoices contained no false representations, in conflict with, the Ninth Circuit ’ s decision in United States v. Miller, the Seventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Chanu, and this Court ’ s decisions in Shaw v. United States, Kelly v. United States, and Ciminelli v. United States . 2. Whether the admission of a confidential settlement communication without Rule 403 balancing and in violation of Federal Rule of Evidence 408 violated the Fifth Amendment right to present a complete defense on Count 9, where the improperly admitted document was used four times to establish criminal intent while the government's own witness confirmed under cross-examination that the defendant sent the document to re-establish a business relationship, the government's own records show a 46-to-l vendor overbilling ratio that independently explains the alleged loss, and the government subsequently reduced Golden Corral restitution by 77 percent upon being confronted with the operational evidence at sentencing — rendering the trial fundamentally unfair under Andrew v. White, 604 U.S. 86 (2025), which the Fourth Circuit never applied.