Obstruction? Barry Bonds Prosecutors Strike Out in the Ninth
In their White-Collar Crime column, Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert write: For white-collar criminal practitioners, the Barry Bonds case presents another example of how the breadth of the federal obstruction laws makes them a nearly irresistible choice for prosecutors, and of the seemingly endless struggle of the courts to define appropriate limits on their reach.
August 03, 2015 at 05:28 PM
11 minute read
The Ninth Circuit's en banc reversal of baseball home run king Barry Bonds' 2011 obstruction of justice conviction1 and the Justice Department's late July announcement that it would drop the case after a more than decade-long investigation and prosecution2 have prompted some to call for a reassessment of Bonds' place in baseball history.3 That controversy is bound to endure. For white-collar criminal practitioners, the Bonds case presents another example of how the breadth of the federal obstruction laws makes them a nearly irresistible choice for prosecutors, and of the seemingly endless struggle of the courts to define appropriate limits on their reach.
History suggests that Congress has found obstruction a difficult topic on which to legislate, though not for lack of trying. The primary federal obstruction statutes are notable for their unusual degree of complexity and overlap. In recent decades, often in response to highly publicized cases, Congress repeatedly has attempted to remedy various perceived “holes” in the coverage of these laws. These legislative efforts and prosecutors' tendency to push on the margins have created further vexing questions of statutory breadth, and have required the courts to impose limitations to cabin these laws within reasonable bounds. The Supreme Court's decision last year in the much-discussed “fish” case, Yates v. United States, is one example.4 The Bonds decision is another prominent chapter in this saga, highlighting persistent questions regarding the reach of the “catchall” clause of a primary obstruction statute, Section 1503 of Title 18.
Overview of Statutes
The federal criminal code contains a plethora of statutes that cover various forms of obstruction of justice, broadly defined as the frustration of government purposes by violence, corruption, destruction of evidence, or deceit.5 Among the most commonly used general obstruction statutes are Section 1503 (obstruction of federal judicial proceedings), Section 1505 (obstruction of congressional and administrative proceedings), Section 1512 (witness tampering), and Section 1519 (destruction or falsification of records in federal investigations).
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1Wine, Dine and Grind (Through the Weekend): Summer Associates Thirst For Experience in 'Real Matters'
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: For Big Law Names, Shorter is Sweeter
- 3The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5'You Are Not Alone': 120 Sex Assault Victims Plan to Sue Sean 'Diddy' Combs
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250