McDonnell v. United States

Last updated

McDonnell v. United States
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 27, 2016
Decided June 27, 2016
Full case name Robert F. McDonnell, Petitioner v. United States
Docket no. 15-474
Citations579 U.S. 550 ( more )
136 S. Ct. 2355; 195 L. Ed. 2d 639
Opinion announcement Opinion announcement
Case history
PriorUnited States v. McDonnell, 64 F. Supp. 3d 783 (E.D. Va. 2014); affirmed, 792 F.3d 478 (4th Cir. 2015); cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 891 (2016).
Holding
An "official act" within the federal bribery statutes does not include merely setting up a meeting, calling another public official, or hosting an event.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy  · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg  · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito  · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Case opinion
MajorityRoberts, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
Hobbs Act, Honest services fraud

McDonnell v. United States, 579 U.S. 550 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the appeal of former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell's conviction for honest services fraud and Hobbs Act extortion. [1] [2] At issue on appeal was whether the definition of "official act" within the federal bribery statutes encompassed the actions for which McDonnell had been convicted and whether the jury had been properly instructed on this definition at trial. [2]

Contents

In light of the Court's findings, U.S. District Judge T. S. Ellis III of Virginia dropped seven of 10 charges for which former Representative William J. Jefferson of New Orleans was convicted in 2012. He ordered him released from prison on October 5, 2017, pending a new sentence or action from the government. [3]

Case background

Anatabloc is a tobacco extract which the company Star Scientific was producing in Virginia. Virginia has been a tobacco-producing state. The governor held events promoting the company's product at his governor's mansion after receiving gifts from the CEO of the company.

At the trial in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, prosecutors charged Robert F. McDonnell and his wife with quid pro quo. The jury found the McDonnells guilty of multiple counts of corruption. James R. Spencer presided over the initial trial.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit unanimously affirmed the convictions of the McDonnells.

Opinion of the Court

Chief Justice John Roberts authored the unanimous opinion. [2] McDonnell's conviction was vacated on the grounds that the meaning of "official act" does not include merely setting up a meeting, calling another public official, or hosting an event.

Impact

Narrowed Definition of Bribery

The ruling narrowed the legal definition of public corruption and made it harder for prosecutors to prove that a political official engaged in bribery. [4] [5] The term "official act" does not occur in the statutes charged in the case; rather, the parties to the trial had agreed that they would use the definition of that term given in the federal bribery statute 18 U.S.C.   § 201(a)(3) in interpreting those statutes. Thus, by construing the term narrowly the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of bribery. [6]

According to Bloomberg News , the ruling "appears to have opened the floodgates for reversals of high-profile public corruption cases, including William Jefferson, a former Louisiana congressman. Former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver; Dean Skelos, a former majority leader of the New York state senate; and Skelos’s son, Adam Skelos, have since had corruption convictions overturned on similar grounds." [5]

The ruling in the Supreme Court case was cited by United States District Court for the District of New Jersey as potential grounds for dismissing the bribery charges in another federal case against United States Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey. [5] The charges were not dismissed, but the case ended in a mistrial, with most of the jurors favoring acquittal. [7]

In the aftermath of the Kids for cash scandal, former President Judge Mark Ciavarella of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas has also cited the Supreme Court ruling in an attempt to overturn his own twenty-eight year sentence in federal prison. The basis for citing the ruling is that it altered the definition of an official act for the crime of bribery. [8] Judge Thomas L. Ambro of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected Ciavarella's appeal. In his opinion, Judge Ambro stated that "Ciavarella’s bribery-related actions still satisfy even a post-McDonnell understanding of ‘official act.’ If sentencing hundreds of juvenile offenders to excessive terms of incarceration is not an ‘official act,’ then nothing is.” [9]

See also

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law - in civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. The double jeopardy protection in criminal prosecutions only bars an identical prosecution for the same offense, however, a different offense may be charged on identical evidence at a second trial. Res judicata protection is stronger - it precludes any causes of action or claims that arise from a previously litigated subject matter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act</span> US federal law

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The case involved Mildred Loving, a Black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man. In 1958, they were sentenced to a year in prison for marrying each other. Their marriage violated Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which criminalized marriage between people classified as "white" and people classified as "colored". The Lovings appealed their conviction to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which upheld it. They then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Jefferson (politician)</span> American politician (born 1947)

William Jennings Jefferson is an American former politician from Louisiana whose career ended after his corruption scandal and conviction. He served as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for nine terms from 1991 to 2009 as a member of the Democratic Party. He represented Louisiana's 2nd congressional district, which includes much of the greater New Orleans area. He was elected as the state's first black congressman since the end of Reconstruction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois</span> United States federal district court in Illinois

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois is the federal trial-level court with jurisdiction over the northern counties of Illinois.

A writ of coram nobis is a legal order allowing a court to correct its original judgment upon discovery of a fundamental error that did not appear in the records of the original judgment's proceedings and that would have prevented the judgment from being pronounced. The term coram nobis is Latin for "before us" and the meaning of its full form, quae coram nobis resident, is "which [things] remain in our presence". The writ of coram nobis originated in the courts of common law in the English legal system during the sixteenth century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dean Skelos</span> American politician

Dean George Skelos is an American former politician from Long Island, New York.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lewis A. Kaplan</span> American judge (born 1944)

Lewis A. Kaplan is an American lawyer and jurist who serves as a senior U.S. district judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. He was the presiding judge in a number of cases involving high-profile defendants, including E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump, Virginia Giuffre v. Prince Andrew,United States v. Bankman-Fried, and trials of Al Qaeda terrorists such as Ahmed Ghailani.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark Ciavarella</span> American convicted felon, former judge

Mark Arthur Ciavarella Jr. is an American convicted felon and former President Judge of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, who was involved, along with fellow judge Michael Conahan, in the "Kids for cash" scandal in 2008, for which he was sentenced to 28 years in federal prison in 2011.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kids for cash scandal</span> Judicial kickbacks case in Pennsylvania

The "kids for cash" scandal centered on judicial kickbacks to two judges at the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, US. In 2008, judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella were convicted of accepting money in return for imposing harsh adjudications on juveniles to increase occupancy at a private prison operated by PA Child Care.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William J. Jefferson corruption case</span> United States corruption case

The corruption case against then Louisiana Representative William J. Jefferson in the United States started on a suspicion of bribery. The FBI raided his Congressional offices in May 2006. He was re-elected to his seat in the fall. On June 4, 2007, a federal grand jury indicted Jefferson on sixteen charges related to corruption. Jefferson was defeated by Republican Joseph Cao on December 6, 2008, and was the most senior Democratic incumbent to lose re-election that year. In 2009 he was tried in the US District Court in Virginia on corruption charges. On August 5, 2009, he was found guilty of 11 of the 16 corruption counts. Jefferson was sentenced to 13 years on November 13, 2009 - the longest sentence ever given to a representative for bribery or any charge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Honest services fraud</span> Crime in the United States

Honest services fraud is a crime defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1346, added by the United States Congress in 1988, which states "For the purposes of this chapter, the term scheme or artifice to defraud includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services."

Several statutes, mostly codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, provide for federal prosecution of public corruption in the United States. Federal prosecutions of public corruption under the Hobbs Act, the mail and wire fraud statutes, including the honest services fraud provision, the Travel Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) began in the 1970s. "Although none of these statutes was enacted in order to prosecute official corruption, each has been interpreted to provide a means to do so." The federal official bribery and gratuity statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) 15 U.S.C. § 78dd, and the federal program bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 666 directly address public corruption.

Ocasio v. United States, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court clarified whether the Hobbs Act's definition of conspiracy to commit extortion only includes attempts to acquire property from someone who is not a member of the conspiracy. The case arose when Samuel Ocasio, a former Baltimore, Maryland police officer, was indicted for participating in a kickback scheme with an automobile repair shop where officers would refer drivers of damaged vehicles to the shop in exchange for cash payments. Ocasio argued that he should not be found guilty of conspiring to commit extortion because the only property that was exchanged in the scheme was transferred from one member of the conspiracy to another, and an individual cannot be found guilty of conspiring to extort a co-conspirator.

Mary Mam Yassin Sey, also known as Mary Mam Yassin Sey and Mary Mamyassin Sey, is a Gambian judge who currently serves as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the Gambia and was also a Judge of the Supreme Court of Vanuatu.

Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980), is a United States Supreme Court case involving issues of privacy in correspondence with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the freedom of the press, the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. After a murder case ended in three mistrials, the judge closed the fourth trial to the public and the press. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled the closing to be in violation of the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment asserting that the First Amendment implicitly guarantees the press access to public trials.

McDonough v. Smith, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 2018 term. In a 6–3 ruling, the Court held that the 3-year statute of limitations for a fabrication of evidence civil lawsuit under section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act begins to run when the criminal case ends in the plaintiff's favor.

References

  1. SCOTUSblog coverage
  2. 1 2 3 McDonnell v. United States,No. 15-474 , 579 U.S. ___(2016).
  3. Greg La Rose, "William Jefferson ordered released from prison after judge drops 7 of 10 counts", New Orleans Times-Picayune, 5 October 2017. Retrieved 7 October 2017
  4. "Corruption Case Against Senator Menendez Ends in Mistrial". The New York Times. November 16, 2017. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 6, 2018.
  5. 1 2 3 Voreacos, David; Weinberg, Neil (October 11, 2017). "Menendez Judge Suggests He May Dismiss Senator's Bribe Counts". Bloomberg.com. Archived from the original on May 27, 2018. Retrieved June 6, 2018.
  6. Taub, Jennifer (2020). Big Dirty Money: Making White Collar Criminals Pay. New York: Penguin. p. 173. ISBN   9781984879981.
  7. Corasaniti, Nick; Schweber, Nate (November 16, 2017). "Corruption Case Against Senator Menendez Ends in Mistrial". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on June 6, 2018. Retrieved August 7, 2023.
  8. D'Annunzio, P. J. (August 8, 2017). "Ciavarella Wants to Use 'McDonnell' in Acquittal Bid". The Legal Intelligencer . Retrieved August 9, 2017.
  9. D'Annunzio, P.J. (March 29, 2019). "Doctor: 3rd Circuit Denies Incarcerated 'Kids-for-Cash' Judge Ciavarella's Bid for New Trial". law.com. Retrieved June 22, 2009.

Further reading