Monday, February 7, 2011

Post-Skilling Conviction Overturned on Corum Nobis

Finding no bribery or kickbacks, a U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of California set aside and vacated in its entirety an honest services mail fraud conviction. See here - Download Judicial Order The Motion to Vacate this Conviction was presented via a Motion of Coram Nobis - Download Corum Nobis Petition Some will obviously claim that this is why section 1346, the honest services fraud provision, should be rewritten.  Others of us will say - this is exactly why such a prosecutorial extension should not be allowed.  When prosecutors have a deprivation of "money or property," even when the property is intangible property, there is ample basis for prosecuting mail and wire fraud. But to allow prosecutions premised on intangible rights, with little understanding of what constitutes intangible rights, provides prosecutors with discretion that allows them to stretch prosecutions beyond what folks would recognize to be criminal conduct. Attorney Doug A. Goss represented the accused in this case.

See also Scott Smith, Recordnet, Judge vacates conviction of ex-prosecutor


Corruption, Fraud, Judicial Opinions, Prosecutors | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Post-Skilling Conviction Overturned on Corum Nobis:


Not surprisingly, this was a highly politically charged case. Which creates fertile ground for overreaching. If a case is unconstitutional under Skilling it is flawed. For example, this case was already shredded bybthe Ninth Circuit. Piece by piece this case has crumbled.

Posted by: David Stearn | Feb 8, 2011 7:19:56 AM

I read the brief, even if they rewrote the statute this gentleman would not be charged. There was no conflict of interest. This was exactly the type of case the Skilling case was targeting.

Posted by: Mark Sotomyer | Feb 8, 2011 9:27:11 AM

The honest services fraud must be rewritten. Others of us say that is exactly why the extension of the prosecution not be allowed. When prosecutors have a deprivation of "money or property", even though the property is intangible, there is no sufficient basis for the Repression of mail and wire fraud.

Posted by: silver eagle dollars | Feb 8, 2011 1:32:50 PM

What is amazing to me is that prosecutors have no consequences for overreaching.

Posted by: Larry Acker | Feb 8, 2011 7:21:15 PM

Post a comment