In 1988, Congress modified the mail and wire-fraud law by making it a crime to defraud citizens of their intangible rights to honest and impartial government. Since then, an increasing number of government officials have been indicted for depriving others of their honest services. This includes a pair of miscreant judges in Pennsylvania. The doctrine is a tool that enabled citizens to hold judges and other public officials accountable for their unlawful actions. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 issued a ruling that stripped the statute of much of its effectiveness.
It might be a good idea for public officials and those who lobby them in Florida to pay attention to what's going on in federal courtrooms around the nation. Especially state legislators.
Federal prosecutors are winning cases using a doctrine called "honest services" fraud. It's a broad way to fight public corruption.
In plain words, the law presumes a public official owes the public a duty of honest services. When the official fails and does so using the mail or telephones  or perhaps e-mail or BlackBerry  while concealing a financial interest, it becomes a crime.
In some states the law has been used to prosecute legislators who accepted jobs or gifts from lobbyists or institutions that receive public money.
Most of us are familiar with bribery and understand that it takes proof that a public official was willing to do something in return for a corrupt payment. But "honest services" fraud is easier to prove than outright bribery.
The change came about in 1988 when Congress specifically rewrote mail and wire fraud laws to include schemes designed to "deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.'' That decision came after the U.S. Supreme Court overruled lower courts and tossed out corruption charges against Kentucky officials, saying those laws did not prohibit schemes to defraud citizens of the intangible right to honest government.
As it frequently does, Congress reworked the statutes to make its intent clear in answer to a court ruling.
Convictions taken under the 1988 law have since been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and a number of appellate courts. "Public officials inherently owe a fiduciary duty to the public to make governmental decisions in the public's best interest,'' wrote the 11th U.S. Circuit in a 1999 case.
Some officials have been prosecuted for omitting income on their financial disclosure statements and voting against legislation affecting the income that was not disclosed. Others have been prosecuted for taking sham jobs with businesses and governmental agencies. A Missouri lawmaker was convicted after he accepted free lodging from an insurance lobbyist. And some have been prosecuted for making and taking campaign contributions in expectation of government action.
It's one of the reasons that public corruption indictments have risen more than 40 percent in the past two years, notes the American Bar Association's White Collar Crime Newsletter. Defense attorneys complain that the charge loads the deck against them, and appellate courts are divided. But hundreds of public officials have gone to jail on the charge.
The charges were among those brought against Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, U.S. Reps. William Jefferson and Randy "Duke" Cunningham and more recently in Palm Beach County corruption cases.
The way federal prosecutors see it, public officials have a duty to make decisions in the best interest of the people who elect them. When they make decisions based on personal interests, they are defrauding the public.
In one case, city employees were prosecuted after they structured the hiring and promotion system so that those who participated in the right political campaign got better jobs and more money.
There are some differences in the New Jersey case and the acceptance of a $110,000-a-year college job by Florida House Speaker Ray Sansom. The New Jersey official failed to disclose his job and funneled money to the college after going on the college payroll. On the day Sansom became speaker, Northwest Florida State College appointed him to an unadvertised job as vice president. A day later the college announced the appointment. Sansom had funneled millions of dollars in construction money to the college. He has denied any wrongdoing but resigned from the college earlier this month after news of the appointment created an uproar. Sansom did say he has consulted Peter Antonacci, a Tallahassee defense attorney who is a former statewide prosecutor.
One governmental lawyer who has been paying a lot of attention to honest services fraud cases is Leon County Attorney Herbert W.A. Thiele. He has written a lengthy memo on the subject and made presentations on the law for city and county officials around the state.
Thiele says he decided to look into the law after reading about the prosecutions in Palm Beach County.
Efforts to put an honest services fraud clause in to state law have so far been unsuccessful, but Sen. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, says he is making another attempt to get legislative approval of the measure this year. Gelber, a former federal prosecutor, said it is a "useful tool that should be part of the arsenal that state prosecutors have."
A good look inside some of these cases might make Florida lawmakers and lobbyists thankful for the 2005 law that prohibits lobbyists from giving gifts to legislators. Assuming, of course, that everyone has obeyed the law.
You might also wonder: Is an honest services investigation in Tallahassee's future?
Acting U.S. Attorney Thomas Kirwin won't say. But some of Tallahassee's best defense attorneys admit they are boning up on the law. And they won't name the potential clients asking for help.
In 1988 Congress, reacting to a Supreme Court decision that tossed out convictions of Kentucky officials, added the phrase "intangible right of honest services" to mail and wire fraud law. The court had said the law did not prohibit schemes to defraud citizens of intangible rights to honest and impartial government. The code is 18 USC 1346. Congress specifically passed it to overturn the court's ruling in McNally vs. U.S., 483 US 350 1987.
Jack Abramoff, a Washington, D.C., lobbyist sentenced in September to four years in prison for corrupting politicians with golf junkets, expensive meals, luxury seats at sporting events and other gifts. He is also serving a sentence of almost six years in an unrelated fraud case involving a casino cruise line he purchased in Florida.
Wayne R. Bryant, a former Democratic New Jersey state senator, was convicted in November of multiple corruption charges, including honest services fraud, for using his power and influence to obtain a low-show job at a state School of Osteopathic Medicine in exchange for bringing millions of dollars in extra funding to the school.
Kevin Geddings, the former North Carolina lottery commissioner, a Democrat, was sentenced in 2006 to four years for concealing work done for a lottery vendor when he accepted a seat on the state lottery commission in 2005. He failed to disclose work for Scientific Games on his state ethics form.
Jeff Skilling, the former Enron CEO, was sentenced in 2007 to 24 years in prison for depriving Enron of his honest services by using a widespread conspiracy to lie to investors about the company's financial health.
Randy "Duke'' Cunningham, the former U.S. representative, R-Calif., was sentenced in March 2006 to eight years in prison after pleading guilty to multiple corruption charges involving his acceptance of more than $2.4-million in homes, yachts, antiques, Persian rugs and other items from defense contractors.
Bob Ney, a former U.S. representative and Ohio Republican, was sentenced in 2007 to 30 months in prison after he admitted corruptly accepting luxury vacation trips, skybox seats at sporting events, campaign contributions and expensive meals from Abramoff.
Don Siegelman, the former Alabama governor, a Democrat, was convicted of multiple charges involving a $500,000 contribution to his campaign to establish a lottery, allegedly in exchange for appointing the donor to a board that regulates hospitals. Sentenced to seven years but has been released pending an appeal after widespread publicity about the involvement of Republican operatives, including former White House political adviser Karl Rove.
Mary McCarty, Palm Beach County Commissioner, a Republican, resigned earlier this month after admitting charges of honest services fraud involving the acceptance of discounts, free hotel stays and other undisclosed gifts provided by businesses doing business with the county. Four other city and county commissioners have been charged with similar crimes since 2006.
From: Lucy Morgan, "Fighting corruption with the 'honest services' doctrine," St. Petersburg Times, January 25, 2009, http://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/article969867.ece, accessed 01/29/09. Caryn Baird contributed to this report. Lucy Morgan is a Times senior correspondent and can be reached at lmorgan@sptimes.com. This article first appeared in print on January 22, 2009. Reprinted in accordance with the "fair use" provision of Title 17 U.S.C. § 107 for a non-profit educational purpose.
Tulanelink thanks attorney Mark Adams for first calling attention to the doctrine of honest services fraud, and attorney Gary Zerman for updating its recent status (see note, below).
Note: The 'honest services' statute has been used to convict dozens of state and local governmental officials, but because it has been so effective, especially in high-profile cases, the Department of Justice has come under pressure to consider weakening its reach.
Lynne Marek, "DOJ may rein in use of 'honest services' statute," The National Law Journal, June 15, 2009, http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202431433581, accessed 06/15/09.
Bruce Alpert, "Justices have doubts on 'honest services' law; Statute's demise would lift Jefferson," The Times-Picayune, New Orleans, December 9, 2009, National, p. A7.
On June 24, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that severely restricts the ability to bring corruption cases against public officials and corporate executives. The judges unanimously ruled to limit the so-called honest service statute (4 min 25 sec).
Nina Totenberg, "High Court Reins In Use Of Fraud Law," National Public Radio, June 25, 2010, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128099972, accessed 07/04/10.