FEDERAL PUBLIC
CORRUPTION
Federal Public Corruption Attorneys in Detroit
Bajoka Law — Leading Attorneys for Federal Public Corruption
WHAT IS PUBLIC CORRUPTION?
Public corruption involves a breach of public trust and/or abuse of position by a government official. Public corruption can occur at any governmental level. A charge of federal public corruption requires a federal official to demand, solicit, accept or agree to receive anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of their official duties. Public corruption in America accounts for over $450 billion each year. The FBI, IRS and ICU (International Corruption Unit) have made public corruption a prime focus in their crime-fighting efforts. If you are being investigated for public corruption it is important to know that the federal government is not taking these cases lightly. Expect the full force of the federal government in investigating and prosecuting public corruption cases.
WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE PUNISHMENTS FOR PUBLIC CORRUPTION?
- Prison: Giving or receiving an illegal gratuity can result in a two-year sentence for each offense. A bribery conviction can lead to 15 years in prison. Conviction under RICO can lead to a 20-year prison sentence. As you can see, many options are on the table in terms of potential prison sentences for a public corruption conviction.
- Probation: Probation is an alternative to jail that a judge can sentence someone for a public corruption conviction. As part of the probation, the offender will have to follow certain guidelines, may have to submit for drug or alcohol screening, and will have an assigned probation agent that they will need to stay in close contact with. Violations of probation can result in lengthy prison sentences.
- Restitution: A judge can order an offender to pay back the money improperly obtained due to their illegal activity. This number can easily end up in the millions of dollars.
- Fines: Anyone convicted of a public corruption offense is subject to hefty fines. A RICO conviction can lead to a $250,000 fine. A conviction under the Travel Act can also lead to a $250,000 fine. With multiple counts, it is easy to see how these fines can easily end up in the millions of dollars.
- Other: A public corruption conviction can result in forfeitures of both money and property as well as loss of governmental position.
WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF PUBLIC CORRUPTION?
- Common examples of public corruption include:
- Accepting or giving kickbacks to secure project approval
- Bribes paid to win government contracts
- Getting paid for false invoices
- Filing false returns to hide illegal money
- Filing false campaign reports
- Soliciting gifts or payments due to governmental position
- Threatening harm to try to obstruct commerce
- Foreign Bribery
The different activities that could be present during the commission of a public corruption crime can lead to various criminal charges. The specific charges under the umbrella of federal public corruption are:
- Bribery (18 U.S.C. § 201(b))
- Gratuites (18 U.S.C. § 201(c))
- Hobbs Act Extortion (18 U.S.C. § 1951)
- Federal Program Bribery (18 U.S.C. § 666)
- Honest Services Mail & Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341, 1343, 1346)
- False Statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
- RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.)
- Theft (18 U.S.C. § 641, 654)
- Travel Act (18 U.S.C. § 1952)
WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE DEFENSES?
The act of public corruption requires a showing of an intent to influence others due to some sort of illegal incentive. It is the United States Attorney’s burden to prove that you had a criminal intent to show that you were guilty of public corruption. Is there any showing of a quid-pro-quo? Are communications being taken out of context? What about other defenses? Were there constitutional violations? Is there even enough evidence? Is the defendant even a public official in the eyes of the law? These are just a few of the defenses and questions a seasoned federal public corruption attorney will ask while building a proper defense for a public corruption case.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
If you or a loved one is being investigated for federal public corruption or have already been indicted, you might be asking yourself, what do I do now? Finding a website such as this can be a great resource, but it is not a substitute for the advice of an experienced attorney.
EXPERIENCE MATTERS
Most attorneys have never stepped foot in a federal courthouse, much less have actually been a part of a federal jury trial. Do you really want your case to be the first your attorney has actually defended in federal court? While the answer to that question might be easy, choosing the right attorney might not be as simple. The right attorney for a federal public corruption case is not someone looking to sign up every person that walks through their door. The right attorney for a federal public corruption case is one that has the proper experience, time, and resources to put into defending your case against the power of the government. The United States government has unlimited resources when it comes to investigating and building cases. Your first step towards leveling the playing field is hiring an attorney who brings years of successful federal criminal defense experience to the table. At Bajoka Law in Detroit, we lean on this past experience to help bring future success.
Read more on Public Corruption
FEDERAL BRIBERY STATUTE EXPLAINED The federal bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201(b), is the most commonly used federal law to prosecute the bribery of public officials. It outlaws anyone directly or indirectly giving, offering to give, or promising anything of value to a public official with the intent to influence an official act. The statute also outlaws influencing a federal official to allow or participate in any fraud against the United States or inducing an official to violate their public duty. The bribery statute also makes it illegal for the public official to seek, receive, or agree to receive something of value to induce them into making a specific official act. In essence, the bribery statute makes both sides guilty if they are involved in an illegal bribe. The most important thing that federal prosecutors are typically looking for in proving a federal bribery case is that the defendant corruptly engaged in a quid pro quo agreement. Quid pro quo can simply be described as a “this for that” arrangement. One person gives something of value expecting something else of value in return. A conviction under the federal bribery statute carries up to fifteen years in prison, along with a fine as determined by the court. FEDERAL GRATUITES STATUTE EXPLAINED The federal gratuites statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201(c), makes it a crime to offer or accept a gratuity to a public official. A gratuity is something of value given for or because of an official act performed or to be performed by a federal public official. Typically, a gratuity is akin to a “tip” for some sort of service rendered. The major difference between federal bribery and federal gratuites is that bribery has more required elements, making it a more serious and difficult offense to prove. Offering or accepting a gratuity is a lesser included offense of federal bribery. A conviction under the federal gratuites statute carries up to two years in prison, along with a fine as determined by the court. If you are facing public corruption charges related to either an allegation of bribery or receiving gratuites, then it is important that you speak to an experienced public corruption attorney who can best guide you. IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BRIBERY AND GRATUITES A gratuity, as stated above, has less required elements to prove than does the federal bribery statute. A federal bribery charge requires proof of a quid pro quo or a corrupt intent to influence some sort of official act. In most cases, the timing of an illegal payment is central to determining if a bribery or gratuites charge is most appropriate. If the payment occurs after the alleged official act, then it is most likely to result in a gratuites charge. If the payment occurs before, then the prosecutor will have better circumstantial evidence to prove the existence of a quid pro quo arrangement and will likely result in bribery charges. A gratuity is different from a bribe as a gratuity must be paid directly to the public official. A bribery charge does not require direct payment to the public official in order to result in a conviction. The descriptions above relating to the federal bribery and gratuites statutes are general in nature and are not intended to be considered legal advice. If you have any questions about political contributions you have made that you are concerned about, or are wondering whether a potential contribution may cause you legal trouble, the attorneys are Bajoka Law are standing by to answer your questions to help put you in the best legal position.
ORIGINAL CASE DETAILS: Larry Householder, Ohio Speaker of the House Ohio Speaker of the House Larry Householder is facing federal charges after being indicted by a federal grand jury for a federal racketeering conspiracy. The case involves Householder, four other individuals, and a 501(c)(4) entity called ‘Generation Now.’ A 501(c)(4) is a corporate entity that is supposed to be designated as a social welfare organization. Generation Now was purported to promote energy independence and economic development. It is alleged that Generation Now was actually secretly controlled by Householder. It is alleged that Householder and his group worked as an ‘enterprise’ and received approximately $60 million dollars into Generation Now to help ensure the passing of Ohio House Bill 6, a $1.3 billion bailout aimed at saving two Ohio nuclear power plants from closing. It is also alleged that the enterprise corruptly worked to defeat a ballot initiative which was aimed at stopping House Bill 6. The enterprise is accused of spending millions of dollars to help Householder win the 2018 election to become the Ohio Speaker of the House by flooding the airways with negative ads against any enterprise opponents. These ads were all allegedly paid for by Generation Now. This case is an example of the Department of Justice’s recent trend towards attempting to expand the use of the RICO Act in targeting political corruption and bribery. The RICO Act was originally passed to fight organized crime. CRIMINAL CHARGES AND POTENTIAL PENALTIES Larry Householder, Generation Now, and four other individuals face federal corruption charges under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. A person is guilty of a RICO charge when: He or she commits at least two acts of racketeering activity; Within a 10-year period; and The acts were deemed made in an enterprise. The ‘acts of racketeering activity’ come from a list of 35 different crimes that are listed within the RICO statute . If someone is convicted of racketeering under the RICO statute, he or she faces a sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison and up to $25,000 in fines for each count. Someone convicted under the RICO statute will also have to forfeit any gains due to the illegal activity. The defense in this case will likely rely heavily on the decision of Kelly v. United States , where the United States Supreme Court made its position clear that the federal government should be limited in its attempt to expand the federal criminal code to the political process. HOW THIS CASE IS IMPORTANT This case has the potential to shape how RICO charges can be used going forward in federal corruption cases. A successful prosecution under the RICO statute will potentially put political donors at risk for future similar charges. Companies should be mindful of how they engage in politics and be certain of the legality of their political contributions. Seemingly harmless acts of making campaign contributions or creating a nonprofit organization can lead to criminal charges when certain factors are present. If you or your organization are involved in making political contributions, then the outcome of this case can affect you directly. If Householder is convicted, it will continue to pave the way for federal authorities to prosecute people with RICO charges for their involvement in political campaign contributions. If you have any questions about the legality of your political contributions, then it is important to seek the advice of an experienced federal public corruption attorney who can best answer your questions.
THE HATCH ACT EXPLAINED The Hatch Act is a federal law that forbids federal employees from taking part in any political activities while they are operating in an official governmental capacity. It has been in existence for over 80 years and is named after former New Mexico Senator Carl A. Hatch (D). The Hatch Act has both civil and criminal provisions within it. The president and vice president are exempt from the civil provisions of the Hatch Act. They are, however, both bound by the criminal provisions of the Hatch Act which forbid intimidating, threatening, or coercing federal employees in any way to participate in political endeavors. The Hatch Act also forbids the President from the use of relief or public works funds for electoral purposes. The criminal provisions of the Hatch Act also bar federal employees from using their status and governmental authority to interfere or affect the election of the president and vice president. The purpose of the Hatch Act is to ensure that the federal workforce is able to function and operate without political influence or coercion in an effort to prevent public corruption . DID PRESIDENT TRUMP VIOLATE THE HATCH ACT? President Donald Trump has drawn heavy criticism over how the Republican National Convention (RNC) was prepared and conducted in relation to the Hatch Act. Governmental ethics experts have voiced that hosting the RNC events from the White House violates federal ethics law. During the RNC, both President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump used the White House as a backdrop for political purposes. President Trump granted a presidential pardon live from the White House, while First Lady Melania Trump gave a speech from the White House Rose Garden. President Trump even oversaw a naturalization live on television performed by acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has also faced scrutiny due to his speech performed from Jerusalem while there on official state business, using the city as a background. Provisions of the Hatch Act aim to prevent politicizing foreign policy and seek to keep federal employees and election activities largely separate. The Democratic party has called for a probe into alleged potential violations by federal employees of the Hatch Act during the RNC. HOW DOES THIS AFFECT ME? If you are a federal employee in any capacity, then this can affect you directly. While most federal employees are allowed to be an active part of political campaigns, the Hatch Act does forbid certain political activity by federal employees. Federal employees are not allowed to: Run for public office partisan elections, Use their official title when taking part in any political activity Seek or accept contributions for partisan political candidates or groups, and Take part in any political activity while on duty. If you have any questions about what you are legally allowed to do under the provisions of the Hatch Act, then it is important that you seek the advice of an experienced federal public corruption attorney. Your activities as a federal employee are governed by laws that are designed to keep partisan political activities out of the day to day responsibilities of your job and role. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. It is your responsibility to understand your role and the limitations you have by law as a federal employee. If you are in the public eye, then it is important to understand that you are also dealing with public trust. A loss of that trust can be devastating to any future career in government work, and a violation of federal public corruption laws such as the Hatch Act can have serious consequences.
Understanding the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is a law originating from the United States that targets international corruption. Specifically, the FCPA forbids bribery of foreign officials and requires certain accounting practices in order to prevent covering up corrupt activities. The FCPA received strong backing from American companies who were not able to keep up in the international marketplace, where bribes and other corrupt acts were common and generally accepted. The anti-bribery provision of the FCPA outlaws payments of bribes or gifts to officials of foreign governments, politicians, and political parties. Certain types of payments are allowed under the FCPA if the actions are lawful under local written law or the expenditure is a reasonable and bona fide one. Payments made to facilitate or “grease the wheels” are allowed in very limited circumstances and are exempt under the FCPA. FCPA IN PRACTICE Federal public corruption as a violation of the FCPA can be established if certain elements are present and proven by the government against you. Violations of the FCPA can result in both criminal and civil liability. In order to establish a violation of the FCPA, the government has to prove three main elements: The accused used a form of interstate commerce, such as a telephone, the internet, or the mail; The accused offered to give something of monetary value to a sitting foreign official, politician, or political party; and The accused sought to influence a government action or gain an unfair advantage, and did so knowingly, willfully, and/or corruptly. The FCPA has provisions that require businesses to have specific requirements on recordkeeping and other internal controls designed to make it more difficult to hide corrupt and illegal activities. Surprisingly, the FCPA doesn’t actually outlaw the acceptance of an alleged bribe by a foreign official. This doesn’t mean that the United States has not gone after officials it suspects of accepting bribes, they just do it a little more creatively. One approach federal prosecutors have used in order to combat the acceptance of bribes by foreign officials is prosecution under the United States money laundering statute. HOW DOES THIS AFFECT ME? If you own or work in a business that has dealings in foreign countries, then you might be at risk. Bribery and other forms of corruption are unfortunately too common in other countries and are sometimes seen as simply the cost of doing business. While foreign officials may be more insulated from the long reach of American law, you, as an American, are not. The FCPA was designed to keep American businesses in line and under control even when they are doing business in other countries. Even if non-Americans might be profiting around you from bribery and other forms of corruption when doing business overseas, you and your company are barred from doing so under the FCPA and other applicable federal law. Your role in these situations will be scrutinized by investigators as they try to build their cases against those it suspects of corrupt behavior. If you have any questions relating to public corruption, it is important that you speak to an experienced federal public corruption attorney as soon as possible. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. It is your responsibility to understand your role and the limitations you have by law. If you have a business that operates in other countries, then you will need to understand the detail and nuance of the FCPA to make sure you remain in compliance and out of trouble.
