Public
Corruption includes a vast number of white collar
wrongful acts, the main goals of which are to receive,
offer, or give, preferred treatment and/or performance
in return for monies, gifts or favors. There are several
different crimes an individual may be charged with
which deal with extortion, bribery, procurement or
government fraud, kickbacks, and misuse of public
authority. Some
varieties of federal statues addressing public corruption
are:
A. Title 18 U.S.C. § 201 - Bribery of public
officials and witnesses;
B. Title 18 U.S.C. § 210 - Offer to procure
appointive public office;
C. Title 18 U.S.C. § 211 - Acceptance of solicitation
to obtain appointive public office;
D. Title 18 U.S.C. § 666 - Bribery concerning
programs receiving federal funds; and
E. Title 18 U.S.C. § 1951 - Interference with
commerce by threats of violence. Extortion under
color of official right.
An
act of public corruption that is often prosecuted
by the United States Attorney's Office is Title
18 U.S.C. § 201 (b)(2) - Willfully accepting
money or gifts in return for performance of an official
act. In order to successfully prosecute a defendant
for this said crime, an Assistant United States
Attorney (AUSA) must present sufficient evidence
that when submitted to a jury or judge would prove
beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. The defendant, a public official, directly or
indirectly, agreed to receive or accept personally
anything of value; and
2. did so freely and with the intention of an unlawful
purpose, in return for being influenced in his role
of an official act, or in return for not committing
an act in violation of his official duty.
So
how have the courts defined violations with regards
to public corruption?
A. The usual business routine of advertising a favorable
business climate by entertaining and doing favors
for possible customers does not become bribery just
because the possible customer is the government;
such indulgences, although inspired by hope of the
greater government business, are not intended as
an equal exchange for that business when they are
in no way contingent upon performance of an official
act or pattern of acts or upon recipient's express
or implied agreement to act in favor to a donor
when necessary. United States v. Arthur, 544 F.2d
730 (4th Cir. 1976).
B. The act in which a $5,000 automobile is given
to a government official, in exchange for that official's
guidance in speeding up a loan application, equals
a violation of this section, making it a crime to
dishonestly offer,promise or give anything of value
to any public official to influence any official
act. United States v. Pommerening, 500 F.2d 92 (10th
Cir. 1974).
C. An incident where the president of an organized
area of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
mandated a 10% payment by contractors out of revenue
that they received on a HUD job in return for a
bias move in the awarding of contracts on such jobs
constituted an illegal kickback contrary to this
section. United States v. Griffin, 401 F. Supp.
1222 (S.D. Ind. 1975).
Possible
Penalties:
Any such person could possibly be found guilty of
a felony, put in prison for up to 15 years, and
be ordered to pay $250,000 or three times equal
to the amount of monies of the thing of value, whichever
is greater.
Frequently,
the prosecuting Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) will
secure a Federal Indictment from a Federal Grand
Jury and charge a defendant not only with some form
of public corruption, but also with mail, wire or
bank fraud, money laundering, securities fraud,
drug crimes, and/or conspiracy/collusion to commit
the previously mentioned crimes. One should also
be aware that since 1987 parole has been extinguished
in the Federal System. Expungement, which is the
removal of conviction from public records, is also
not available.
|
Previous