Obstruction of justice

Last updated

Obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, is an act that involves unduly influencing, impeding, or otherwise interfering with the justice system, especially the legal and procedural tasks of prosecutors, investigators, or other government officials. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of perverting the course of justice.

Contents

Obstruction is a broad crime that may include acts such as perjury, making false statements to officials, witness tampering, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, and many others. Obstruction also applies to overt coercion of court or government officials via the means of threats or actual physical harm, and also applying to deliberate sedition against a court official to undermine the appearance of legitimate authority.[ citation needed ]

Obstruction of justice is an umbrella term covering a variety of specific crimes. [1] Black's Law Dictionary defines it as any "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice". [2] Obstruction has been categorized by various sources as a process crime, [3] a public-order crime, [4] [5] or a white-collar crime. [6]

Obstruction can include crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general.

Federal law

In federal law, crimes constituting obstruction of justice are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code. [7] [8] This chapter contains provisions covering various specific crimes such as witness tampering and retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, and theft of court records. [9] It also includes more general sections covering obstruction of proceedings in federal courts, Congress, [10] and federal executive agencies. [9] One of the broadest provisions in the chapter, known as the Omnibus Clause, states that anyone who "corruptly... endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" in connection with a pending court proceeding is subject to punishment. [11]

Statistics regarding the frequency of obstruction of justice prosecutions are unclear. [12] In 2004, federal agencies arrested 446 people for obstruction, representing 0.3 percent of all federal arrests. [13] This does not include, however, people who were charged with obstruction in addition to a more serious underlying crime. [12]

Sentencing enhancement

Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant convicted of any crime is subject to a more severe sentence if they are found to have obstructed justice by impeding the investigation or prosecution of their crimes. [14] [15] While a separate conviction for the crime of obstruction would require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, a finding of obstruction for sentencing purposes only needs to meet the looser standard of "a preponderance of the evidence" (unless the enhanced sentence would exceed the statutory maximum sentence for the underlying crime). [16]

An obstruction finding adds two levels to the offender's sentence, which can result in as much as an additional 68 months of prison. [17] In 2017, the obstruction enhancement was applied in 1,319 cases, representing 2.1 percent of all sentences issued in federal courts. [18]

State law

State laws regarding obstruction of justice vary widely. A 2004 survey found that 24 states and the District of Columbia had a general statute criminalizing obstruction of justice or obstruction of government functions in broad terms, similar to those found in federal law. [9] All states have laws prohibiting some specific types of obstruction, such as witness tampering, jury tampering, or destruction of evidence. [9]

History

From the creation of the federal courts by the Judiciary Act of 1789, judges had the power to summarily punish those who obstructed justice by holding them in contempt of court. [19] [20]

A scandal in 1830 led to reform of the contempt law and the creation of obstruction of justice as a separate offense. Federal judge James H. Peck imprisoned a lawyer for contempt for publishing a letter criticizing one of Peck's opinions. In an effort to prevent such abuses, Congress passed a law in 1831 limiting the application of the summary contempt procedures to offenses committed in or near the court. A new section, which survives today as the Omnibus Clause, was added to punish contempts committed outside of the court, but only after indictment and trial by jury. [19] [20]

In 1982, in response to concerns that the obstruction law did not provide adequate protection to crime victims and other witnesses, Congress broadened the law against witness tampering and criminalized retaliation against witnesses, as part of the Victim and Witness Protection Act. [21]

The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 strengthened the obstruction laws regarding destruction of evidence before an investigation or proceeding has begun, in response to accounting firm Arthur Andersen's widely reported shredding of documents related to the Enron scandal. [22]

Notable examples

See also

Footnotes

  1. Posner, Richard A. (2009). An Affair of State: The Investigation, Impeachment, and Trial of President Clinton. Harvard University Press. p. 37. ISBN   9780674042322.
  2. Doyle, Charles (April 17, 2014). Obstruction of Justice: An Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes That Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities (Report). Congressional Research Service. p. 1. Retrieved June 17, 2019.
  3. Murphy, Erin. "The Crime Factory: Process, Pretext, and Criminal Justice" (PDF). Georgetown Law Journal. 97: 1437. Retrieved June 19, 2019.
  4. Burfeind, James; Bartusch, Dawn Jeglum (2011). Juvenile Delinquency: An Integrated Approach. Jones & Bartlett. p. 62. ISBN   9781449654337.
  5. "All Terms & Definitions". Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved June 19, 2019.
  6. Baer, Miriam H. "Sorting Out White-Collar Crime" (PDF). Texas Law Review. 97 (2): 227. Retrieved June 19, 2019.
  7. Riley, Tina M. (January 1, 1999). "Tampering with Witness Tampering: Resolving the Quandary Surrounding 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512". Washington University Law Review. 77 (1): 249–275.
  8. 18 U.S.C. ch. 73
  9. 1 2 3 4 Decker, John (November 1, 2004). "The Varying Parameters of Obstruction of Justice in American Criminal Law". Louisiana Law Review. 65 (1).
  10. "United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Michael B. Mitchell; Clarence M. Mitchell, Iii, defendants-appellants, 877 F.2d 294 (4th Cir. 1989)". In sum, we affirm appellants' convictions of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1505 because the evidence at trial supported the jury's verdict that they corruptly endeavored to influence a House investigation
  11. Hsen, Mark; Evert, Nicholas; Susca, Rien; Wendzel, Bailey (2018). "Obstruction of Justice". American Criminal Law Review. 55 (3): 1499–1501.
  12. 1 2 Hill, Dana (January 1, 2004). "Anticipatory Obstruction of Justice: Pre-Emptive Document Destruction under the Sarbanes-Oxley Anti-Shredding Statute, 18 U.S.C. 1519". Cornell Law Review. 89 (6): 1519.
  13. Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, 2004 (PDF) (Report). Bureau of Justice Statistics. December 2006. p. 17. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
  14. Guidelines Manual (PDF). United States Sentencing Commission. 2018. pp. 359–361. Retrieved June 14, 2019.
  15. Flumenbaum, Martin; Karp, Brad S. (May 30, 2014). "Perjured Statements as a Basis for Sentencing Enhancement". New York Law Review. 251 (103).
  16. Foster, Michael A. (August 24, 2018). Judicial Fact-Finding and Criminal Sentencing: Current Practice and Potential Change (Report). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved June 14, 2019.
  17. Doyle, Charles (April 17, 2014). Obstruction of Justice: An Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes That Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities (Report). Congressional Research Service. p. 79. Retrieved June 17, 2019.
  18. Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics (PDF) (Report). U. S. Sentencing Commission. 2017. Table 18. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
  19. 1 2 "Criminal Venue in the Federal Courts: The Obstruction of Justice Puzzle". Michigan Law Review. 82 (1): 98–99. 1983. doi:10.2307/1288587. JSTOR   1288587.
  20. 1 2 Fitzpatrick, James (January 1, 1996). "The Supreme Court's Bipolar Approach to the Interpretation of 18 U.S.C. 1503 and 18 U.S.C. 2232(c)". Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 86 (4): 1383. doi:10.2307/1144062. JSTOR   1144062.
  21. Riley, Tina M. (January 1, 1999). "Tampering with Witness Tampering: Resolving the Quandary Surrounding 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512". Washington University Law Review. 77 (1): 249–275.
  22. Hill, Dana (January 1, 2004). "Anticipatory Obstruction of Justice: Pre-Emptive Document Destruction under the Sarbanes-Oxley Anti-Shredding Statute, 18 U.S.C. 1519". Cornell Law Review. 89 (6): 1519.
  23. Lyons, Richard; Chapman, William (July 28, 1974). "Judiciary Committee approves article to impeach President Nixon, 27 to 11". Washington Post. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  24. "For the purpose of deceiving the people". Wall Street Journal. November 13, 1998. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  25. Holson, Laura M. (September 8, 2018). "'No One Could Believe It': When Ford Pardoned Nixon Four Decades Ago". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 11, 2019.
  26. Johnston, David (December 24, 1992). "Bush pardons 6 in Iran affair, aborting a Weinberger trial; prosecutor assails 'cover-up'". The New York Times. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  27. Marcus, Ruth (December 20, 1998). "Explanation of Article III". Washington Post. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  28. Weil, Jonathan; Barrionuevo, Alexei (June 16, 2002). "Arthur Andersen is convicted on obstruction-of-justice count". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved June 18, 2019.
  29. Mears, Bill (May 31, 2005). "Arthur Andersen conviction overturned". CNN. Retrieved June 18, 2019.
  30. Seigel, Michael; Slobogin, Christopher (2005). "Prosecuting Martha: Federal Prosecutorial Power and the Need for a Law of Counts". Penn State Law Review. 109 (4): 1107–1131. ISSN   1545-7877.
  31. Darani, Shaheen (January 1, 2006). "Behavior of the Defendant in a Competency-to-Stand-Trial Evaluation Becomes an Issue in Sentencing". Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online. 34 (1): 126–128.
  32. "Highlights from Libby indictment". CNN. October 28, 2005. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  33. Lewis, Neil A. (March 7, 2007). "Libby guilty of lying in C.I.A. leak case". The New York Times. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  34. Baker, Peter (April 13, 2018). "Trump Pardons Scooter Libby in a Case That Mirrors His Own". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 11, 2019.
  35. Miller, Judith (April 14, 2018). "Belated justice for Scooter Libby" . Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  36. Siklos, Richard (July 14, 2007). "Conrad Black Found Guilty in Fraud Trial". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved August 31, 2016.
  37. "Trump pardons billionaire friend Conrad Black, who wrote a book about him". The Washington Post. May 15, 2019. Retrieved June 11, 2019.
  38. "Barry Bonds convicted of obstruction of justice in performance-enhancing-drugs case". Los Angeles Times. April 13, 2011. Retrieved May 22, 2018.
  39. Egelko, Bob (April 23, 2015). "Appeals court overturns Barry Bonds' obstruction conviction". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  40. Sherman, Mark (April 18, 2019). "The 10 instances of possible obstruction in Mueller report". Associated Press. Retrieved June 18, 2019.
  41. Schmidt, Michael S.; Savage, Charlie (April 18, 2019). "Mueller Rejects View That Presidents Can't Obstruct Justice". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 3, 2019.
  42. "House Judiciary Committee Unveils Investigation into Threats Against the Rule of Law". Committee on the Judiciary - Democrats. March 4, 2019. Retrieved June 16, 2019.
  43. "Feds arrest Spring Hill woman for alleged role in 1/6 Capitol attack". WFTS. June 3, 2021. Retrieved June 13, 2021.
  44. Treisman, Rachel (February 25, 2021). "A Man Called His Ex A 'Moron' By Text While Storming The Capitol. She Turned Him In". NPR.org. Retrieved June 13, 2021.
  45. "Trevor Jacob admits to intentional crash for clicks". www.aopa.org. December 5, 2023. Retrieved December 6, 2023.

Related Research Articles

<i>Starr Report</i>

The Starr Report, officially the Referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity with the Requirement of Title 28, United States Code, Section 595(c), is a United States federal government report by Independent Counsel Ken Starr concerning his investigation of President Bill Clinton. Delivered to the United States Congress on September 9, 1998, the allegations in the report led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton and the five-year suspension of Clinton's law license.

A pardon is a government decision to allow a person to be relieved of some or all of the legal consequences resulting from a criminal conviction. A pardon may be granted before or after conviction for the crime, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction.

Contempt of Congress is the act of obstructing the work of the United States Congress or one of its committees. Historically, the bribery of a U.S. senator or U.S. representative was considered contempt of Congress. In modern times, contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a congressional committee or subcommittee—usually seeking to compel either testimony or the production of requested documents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Impeachment of Bill Clinton</span> 1998 presidential impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton, the 42nd president of the United States, was impeached by the United States House of Representatives of the 105th United States Congress on December 19, 1998, for "high crimes and misdemeanors". The House adopted two articles of impeachment against Clinton, with the specific charges against Clinton being lying under oath and obstruction of justice. Two other articles had been considered but were rejected by the House vote.

Witness tampering is the act of attempting to improperly influence, alter or prevent the testimony of witnesses within criminal or civil proceedings.

<i>United States v. Libby</i> Trial for interference with Plame affair

United States v. Libby was the federal trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a former high-ranking official in the George W. Bush administration, for interfering with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's criminal investigation of the Plame affair.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scooter Libby</span> American lawyer and political advisor

Irve Lewis "Scooter" Libby is an American lawyer and former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney known for his high-profile indictment and clemency.

The Scooter Libby clemency controversy arose when U.S. President George W. Bush commuted the prison sentence of Scooter Libby, the former Chief of Staff to Bush's vice president, Dick Cheney, on July 2, 2007. It resulted in a hearing, "The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials", held July 11, 2007, by the full Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives. The hearing was intended to "explore the grave questions that arise when the Presidential clemency power is used to erase criminal penalties for high-ranking executive branch employees whose offenses relate to their work for the President", as well as to assess the consequences of the perjury and obstruction of justice of which vice-presidential Chief of Staff Lewis Libby was convicted March 6, 2007.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amy Berman Jackson</span> American judge (born 1954)

Amy Sauber Berman Jackson is an American attorney and jurist serving as a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Allen Hayes Loughry, II is a former justice on the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Efforts to impeach Donald Trump</span> Efforts to impeach the 21st-century US president

Various people and groups assert that former U.S. president Donald Trump engaged in impeachable activity both before and during his presidency, and talk of impeachment began before he took office. Grounds asserted for impeachment have included possible violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution by accepting payments from foreign dignitaries; alleged collusion with Russia during the campaign for the 2016 United States presidential election; alleged obstruction of justice with respect to investigation of the collusion claim; and accusations of "Associating the Presidency with White Nationalism, Neo-Nazism and Hatred", which formed the basis of a resolution for impeachment brought on December 6, 2017.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mueller special counsel investigation</span> US investigation into Russian interference in US elections

The Robert Mueller special counsel investigation was an investigation into 45th U.S. president Donald Trump regarding Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and was conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller from May 2017 to March 2019. It was also called the Russia investigation, the Mueller probe, and the Mueller investigation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trials of Paul Manafort</span>

The two criminal trials of Paul Manafort were the first cases brought to trial by the special counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Manafort served as campaign chair for the Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign from June 20 to August 19, 2016. In July 2017, the FBI conducted a raid of Manafort's home, authorized by search warrant under charges of interference in the 2016 election. Manafort and his business assistant Rick Gates were both indicted and arrested in October 2017 for charges of conspiracy against the United States, making false statements, money laundering, and failing to register as foreign agents for Ukraine. Gates entered a plea bargain in February 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timeline of investigations into Donald Trump and Russia (January–June 2019)</span>

This is a timeline of events in the first half of 2019 related to investigations into the many suspicious links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies relating to the Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. It follows the timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, both before and after July 2016, until November 8, 2016, the transition, the first and second halves of 2017, the first and second halves of 2018, and followed by the second half of 2019, 2020, and 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mueller report</span> 2019 U.S. government report on Russian interference in the 2016 election

The Mueller report, officially titled Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, is the official report documenting the findings and conclusions of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 United States presidential election, allegations of conspiracy or coordination between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia, and allegations of obstruction of justice. The report was submitted to Attorney General William Barr on March 22, 2019, and a redacted version of the 448-page report was publicly released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on April 18, 2019. It is divided into two volumes. The redactions from the report and its supporting material were placed under a temporary "protective assertion" of executive privilege by then-President Trump on May 8, 2019, preventing the material from being passed to Congress, despite earlier reassurance by Barr that Trump would not exert privilege.

<i>Where Law Ends</i> 2020 non-fiction book by Andrew Weissmann

Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation is a best-selling non-fiction book written by Andrew Weissmann, a former Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA), and later a General Counsel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 2011 to 2013. Released by Random House on September 29, 2020, the widely read book gives an insider's view into Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller's highly controversial investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election of Donald Trump.

Corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding is a felony under U.S. federal law. It was enacted as part of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 in reaction to the Enron scandal, and closed a legal loophole on who could be charged with evidence tampering by defining the new crime very broadly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Justice Department investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election</span> Criminal investigation of Trump 2020

The United States Justice Department investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election began in early 2021 with investigations and prosecutions of hundreds of individuals who participated in the January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol. By early 2022, the investigation had expanded to examine Donald Trump's inner circle, with the Justice Department impaneling several federal grand juries to investigate the attempts to overturn the election. Later in 2022, a special counsel was appointed. On August 1, 2023, Trump was indicted. The indictment also describes six alleged co-conspirators.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal impeachment in the United States</span> Procedure of officially accusing a civil officer

In the United States, federal impeachment is the process by which the House of Representatives charges the president, vice president, or another civil federal officer for alleged misconduct. The House can impeach an individual with a simple majority of the present members or other criteria adopted by the House according to Article One, Section 2, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.