Posted on June 1, 2011 by Anthony Lake

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Conrad Black's Appeal of His Two Remaining Convictions

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday denied the petition for certiorari by former international media mogul, Canadian citizen and British Lord, Conrad Moffat Black, as reported in the Washington Post.

Mr. Black was the CEO of Hollinger International, Inc., which owned newspapers worldwide. He was indicted (in an indictment made available by FindLaw which may be viewed here) with other officers and employees of Hollinger in the Northern District of Illinois in November of 2005 on 11 counts, in an original indictment which charged mail fraud conspiracy, wire fraud conspiracy and substantive counts of mail and wire fraud. The counts all referenced the "honest services" fraud statute, 18 United States Code section 1346. Testifying to the vigorousness of his defense, on July of 2007, a jury acquitted Mr. Black on 9 counts but convicted him on three others.

Mr. Black then challenged his convictions on appeal. In June of last year, the Supreme Court handed down its three "honest services" decisions, Skilling v. U.S., Black v. U.S., and Weyrauch v. U.S. In Skilling, the main decision involving former Enron President Jeffrey Skilling, the Court rejected the old "intangible right" to an employee's honest services theory and held that, in order to avoid being unconstitutionally vague, section 1346 applies to bribery or kickback schemes, and not to mere self-dealing by an employee. In Mr. Black's case, the Court unanimously held that the jury had not been properly instructed on honest services fraud at trial, and vacated his convictions and remanded. Then in October of last year, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion authored by distinguished Judge Richard Posner, struck two of the three remaining counts against Mr. Black, leaving him convicted on a single fraud count and a count for obstruction of justice. Mr. Black again appealed these two remaining convictions to the Seventh Circuit, which upheld them last December, and then to the Supreme Court, which has now declined to review them. Mr. Black is scheduled to be resentenced on June 24.

Source: McLean's.ca

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted on October 11, 2010 by Anthony Lake

Federal Prosecutors Observe "No Touch" Ruling on Possible Retrial of San Diego Councilman for Alleged Honest Services Fraud; Former Alaska Chief of Staff to Have Honest Services Conviction Dismissed

Last week was a good one for public officials charged with Federal crimes. First, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of California announced that it would not seek a second trial of former San Diego Councilman Michael Zucchet on alleged honest services fraud charges pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1346, relating to political contributions from the owner of a strip club, as reported by the Los Angeles Times. Mr. Zucchet was indicted with two other City Council members and an aide in 2003. The government alleged that the Council members had a meeting with a lobbyist for the strip club owner for the alleged purpose of changing the City's "no touch" ordinances relating to strip clubs. The Council members, however, argued that they reported the contributions on their financial disclosure forms. The government's decision was prompted by the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in U.S. v. Skilling, No. 08-2349, in which, as we have noted,  the Court held that the "honest services" mail fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1346, applies to bribery and kickback schemes, and not to mere "undisclosed self-dealing by a public official or private employee," alone.

Councilman Charles Lewis died before trial. Mr. Zucchet and Councilman Ralph Inzunza were convicted by a jury following trial in July of 2005. However, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller dismissed the jury's guilty verdict on seven counts against Mr. Zucchet. The Judge permitted the government to retry Mr. Zucchet on the two remaining counts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court's ruling on appeal. Mr. Inzunza has also appealed his convictions. Mr. Zucchet resigned from the Council soon after his conviction, and is currently General Manager of the San Diego Municipal Employees Association.

Then, according to the Achorage Daily News, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Alaska announced that it would agree to the dismissal of the honest services fraud conviction of Jim Clark. Mr. Clark was the former Chief of Staff to Alaska Governor Frank Murkowski, a lobbyist and attorney, and was once viewed as the most powerful unelected official in Alaska. The U.S. Attorney's Office announced that Mr. Clark's 2008 guilty plea was to a felony that no longer exists, pursuant to the Supreme Court's Skilling decision. Mr. Clark pled guilty to alleged conspiring with former officials of the defunct oil-field services company Veco Corp. to channel $68,550 in illegal contributions to Governor Murkowski's political campaign -- without the Governor's knowledge. He is expected to be a witness for the government in a possible upcoming trial of State Representative Bruce Weyhrauch on bribery, extortion and conspiracy charges. Mr. Clark's law license, which was suspended following his guilty plea, is expected to be reinstated by the Alaska Supreme Court.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted on March 1, 2010 by Anthony Lake

Oral Arguments in Skilling Case Focus on Jury Selection Issues, Less Emphasis on Honest Services Fraud

According to Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog,  Ashby Jones at the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, and Professor Ellen S. Podgor of Stetson University College of Law and the White Collar Crime Prof Blog, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed more interested in the jury selection/fair trial issues in yesterday's oral arguments in the case of former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, Skilling v. U.S., Case No. 08-1394 then it did in the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 1346, the federal honest services fraud statute. The transcript of the oral argument may be read here. After lengthy questioning regarding the jury selection at Skilling's trial by Justice Stephen G. Breyer and others, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., raised the question of honest services. Skilling's counsel, Sri Srinivasan, appeared to have adopted the strategy of arguing for a new trial based upon juror bias relating to the Enron scandal rather than a reversal of Skilling's convictions for honest services fraud. Srinivasan argued that the Department of Justice was interpreting the law broadly enough to reach virtually any falsehood told by an employee.

Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. Dreeben argued for the government. Dreeben argued ways in which the Court could interpret the honest services fraud statute in order to avoid holding it unconstitutionally vague. Justice Anthony Kennedy stated to Dreeben that it was Congress' job to rewrite the statute and Justice Antonin Scalia remarked on the excessive scope of the statute.

The Court's decision in the case is expected this spring or summer. The parties' arguments regarding honest services fraud largely mirrored the arguments in the two other challenges to 1346 which the Court had heard this term. Commentators have opined that 1346 may not survive without being sent to Congress for reshaping.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,