The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the money laundering conspiracy conviction of Christopher Lopez, who owned and operated C&D Motorsports, a used car dealership in Pennsylvania. The non-precedential opinion, filed Jan. 22, 2026, rejected Lopez's appeal of his jury conviction from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Lopez was found guilty by a jury of conspiring to conduct a financial transaction with the intent to conceal the nature and source of property represented by a law enforcement officer to be proceeds of a specified unlawful activity. The case involved an undercover federal operation targeting his car dealership business.
According to court records, Lopez operated C&D Motorsports with employee Mike Torres, who worked as a car salesman and served as a co-defendant in the case. The criminal activity came to light through an undercover investigation conducted by federal agents.
On Oct. 16, 2019, two undercover federal agents, John Thompson and Lisa Ulrikson, visited C&D Motorsports while pretending to be customers. The agents posed as individuals seeking to conduct transactions that would help conceal the source of what they represented to be illegally obtained funds.
Following his conviction, Lopez filed post-trial motions seeking a judgment of acquittal and a new trial, both of which the district court denied. District Judge Jennifer P. Wilson presided over the original trial and ruled on the post-conviction motions.
On appeal to the Third Circuit, Lopez raised two primary arguments challenging his conviction. First, he contended that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove that he agreed to commit the substantive offense of money laundering conspiracy. Lopez argued that the government failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly entered into an agreement to conduct financial transactions designed to conceal illegal proceeds.
Second, Lopez argued that the underlying indictment was constructively amended during the course of the trial. A constructive amendment occurs when the government effectively changes the charges against a defendant through the presentation of evidence or legal arguments that differ substantially from what was alleged in the original indictment. Such amendments violate a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the charges against him.
The Third Circuit panel, composed of Circuit Judges Krause, Phipps, and Chung, rejected both arguments and affirmed Lopez's conviction. Circuit Judge Chung authored the opinion for the court.
In addressing Lopez's sufficiency of evidence challenge, the court presumably found that the government had presented adequate proof of Lopez's knowing participation in the conspiracy. Money laundering conspiracy charges require prosecutors to prove that defendants knowingly agreed to conduct financial transactions with the intent to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of proceeds from illegal activity.
The court also rejected Lopez's constructive amendment argument, finding that the government's case at trial remained consistent with the charges outlined in the original indictment. Constructive amendment claims are reviewed for plain error when not objected to at trial, making them difficult to prove on appeal.
The case was submitted to the Third Circuit under Local Appellate Rule 34.1(a), which provides for expedited handling of certain appeals without oral argument. The appeal was submitted on Dec. 9, 2025, and decided approximately six weeks later.
The opinion is marked as "not precedential," meaning it does not establish binding legal precedent for future cases. Non-precedential opinions are typically issued in cases that apply well-established legal principles to specific factual circumstances without breaking new legal ground.
The conviction represents another successful prosecution in federal efforts to combat money laundering operations, particularly those involving legitimate businesses used to disguise illegal financial activity. Car dealerships have been targeted in various federal investigations due to their cash-intensive nature and potential for facilitating the laundering of criminal proceeds.
The case originated in 2022 with the filing of criminal charges in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The timeline from initial charges to final appellate decision spanned approximately four years, reflecting the complex nature of financial crime prosecutions.
Lopez's conviction carries potential penalties under federal money laundering statutes, though specific sentencing details were not included in the appellate opinion. Federal money laundering conspiracy charges can result in significant prison sentences and financial penalties.
The Third Circuit's affirmance closes the appellate process for Lopez unless he seeks review by the Supreme Court, which would require filing a petition for certiorari. Given the non-precedential nature of the decision and the fact-specific issues involved, Supreme Court review appears unlikely.
The case demonstrates federal law enforcement's continued focus on dismantling money laundering operations that use legitimate businesses as fronts for criminal financial activity.