Jurisdictional-grounds-for-SCOTUS-review

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Petitioner, Rossen Iossifov (“Iossifov”), was indicted on July 5, 2018, and charged with one count of conspiring to engage in racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1962(d) (Count 1) and one count of knowingly conducting and attempting to conduct financial transactions affecting interstate and foreign commerce, which transactions involved the proceeds of fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1956(a)(1) and (a)(2) (Count 38). The United States alleged (and Iossifov does not deny) that most of Iossifov’s Romanian co-defendants were engaged in a scheme in which they would post advertisements on online sales platforms like eBay or Craigslist for non-existent goods like motor vehicles and would convince unsuspecting victims to purchase debit cards and send them as payment for the non-existent items. An American middleman would then convert the debit cards to money orders which were ultimately converted to Bitcoin for a percentage of the profit from the fake sale. There was no evidence presented at trial that Iossifov had any contact with any of the American fraud victims. Furthermore, Iossifov had never set foot in the United States prior to his extradition to stand trial for the offenses alleged in the indictment. Jossifov is a Bulgarian citizen who after working in a factory and operating an accounting business, opened a Bitcoin exchange business in 2014 which was called RG Coin. Iossifov registered the business with the Bulgarian government, advertised on the internet, and opened an office with a sign on the door advertising the name of the business. When dealing with customers, he used his own legal name or the name of his business (which was derived from the initials of his name-Rossen Georgiov) and, unlike the Romanian customers who it was later determined were engaged in fraudulent activity, never attempted to conceal his identity. Jossifov was not aware that the Romanian customers later charged with fraud were engaged in fraudulent activities until an arrest and extradition warrant was served on him at his home in the early morning hours of December 11, 2018. The United States introduced evidence at trial that most of RG Coin’s customers were not engaged in fraudulent activities. At trial, the only direct evidence offered by the United States that Iossifov was aware of the fraudulent activities of the Romanian 2 customers was the testimony of a co-defendant, Andrei Stocia, about a hearsay statement allegedly made by Razvan Sandu, a co-defendant who had not been apprehended and who did not testify at trial. This Court should grant certiorari and review Iossifov’s conviction on jurisdictional grounds for three reasons. First, there was no venue in the Eastern District of Kentucky and conducting a trial there violated the United States Constitution. Second, none of the laws that Iossifov was charged with violating applied outside of the United States. Third, the prosecution violated Iossifov’s due process rights because the United States had no legitimate interest in prosecuting the charged conduct as to Iossifov. Assertion of jurisdiction in this case conflicts with prior decisions of this Court and this Court should grant certiorari to correct the violation of Iossifov’s rights and ensure the rights of future defendants are not violated by the improper assertion of extraterritorial jurisdiction. 3 LIST OF PROCEEDINGS United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit No. 215063/5404 United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Rossen Iossifov, Defendant-Appellant Date of Final Opinion: August 12, 2022 4