Black v. United States (2009)
- Docket
- 08-876
- Decided
- 2009-01-01
Summary
Question: 1) Does 18 U.S.C. Section 1346 apply to private individuals whose alleged "scheme to defraud" did not intend harm to the private party to whom "honest services" were owed? 2) May a court of appeals avoid review of a prejudicial jury instruction by retroactively imposing a verdict preservation requirement that is not found in the federal rules? Conclusion: Not answered. No. With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg writing for the majority, the Supreme Court held that based on its decision in Skilling v. United States , Section 1346 criminalizes only schemes to defraud that involve bribes or kickbacks. Therefore, the "honest services fraud" instruction given in this case was incorrect. The Court further held that Mr. Black and his co-defendants secured their right to challenge the "honest services fraud" jury instructions on appeal because they properly objected to the instructions at trial. The Court noted that it expressed no opinion as to whether the jury instruction prejudiced the defendants and left it for the district court to determine. Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, concurred in part and concurred in the judgment. He disagreed that the Court used the Notes of the Advisory Committee in rendering its decision. He also viewed the "honest services fraud" jury instruction to be error because it was given at all. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy concurred in part and concurred in the judgment. He viewed Section 1346 as being unconstitutionally vague.