Jolivet was convicted of mail fraud and money laundering in connection with an insurance fraud scheme she carried out with her husband. They provided fraudulent documents to insurance companies to extract settlements for auto accidents that never occurred. She appealed the conviction, contending that she was not guilty of money laundering because she never hid the funds that were taken improperly. Was Jolivet correct

Money laundering is the term used to describe a situation where an illegal amount of money is available in a financial system so that it appears that this money has a legal origin, but it does not, because it was acquired fraudulently. It is the famous "dirty money".

Money laundering is characterized as a way of hiding where the money originated, because that money generally originated in an illegal way such as trafficking, prostitution, political corruption, tax evasion etc.

As you can see, money laundering is totally related to the origin of money and so we can say that Jolivet is incorrect. That's because although she never hid funds that were taken wrongly, she hid the truth about the origins of money.