Post by Admin on Nov 25, 2015 20:58:44 GMT
Obstruction of Justice
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Obstruction+of+Justice
Obstruction may consist of any attempt to hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime. The acts by which justice is obstructed may include bribery, murder, intimidation, and the use of physical force against witnesses, law enforcement officers or court officials.
obstruction of justice
n. an attempt to interfere with the administration of the courts, the judicial system or law enforcement officers, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence, or interfering with an arrest. Such activity is a crime.
A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court.
The integrity of the judicial system depends on the participants' acting honestly and without fear of reprisals. Threatening a judge, trying to bribe a witness, or encouraging the destruction of evidence are examples of obstruction of justice. Federal and state laws make it a crime to obstruct justice.
Obstruction of justice in the federal courts is governed by a series of criminal statutes (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501–1517), which aim to protect the integrity of federal judicial proceedings as well as agency and congressional proceedings. Section 1503 is the primary vehicle for punishing those who obstruct or who endeavor to obstruct federal judicial proceedings.
Section 1503 proscribes obstructions of justice aimed at judicial officers, grand and petit jurors, and witnesses. The law makes it a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate against these participants in a criminal or civil proceeding. In addition, section 1503 makes it illegal to attempt the Bribery of an official to alter the outcome of a judicial proceeding.
Besides these specific prohibitions, section 1503 contains the Omnibus Clause, which states that a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice. This clause offers broad protection to the "due administration of justice." Federal courts have read this clause expansively to proscribe any conduct that interferes with the judicial process.
To obtain a conviction under section 1503, the government must prove that there was a pending federal judicial proceeding, the defendant knew of the proceeding, and the defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding.
Two types of cases arise under the Omnibus Clause: the concealment, alteration, or destruction of documents; and the encouraging or rendering of false testimony. Actual obstruction is not needed as an element of proof to sustain a conviction. The defendant's endeavor to obstruct justice is sufficient. "Endeavor" has been defined by the courts as an effort to accomplish the purpose the statute was enacted to prevent. The courts have consistently held that "endeavor" constitutes a lesser threshold of purposeful activity than a criminal "attempt."
Federal obstruction of justice statutes have been used to prosecute government officials who have sought to prevent the disclosure of damaging information. The Watergate scandal of the 1970s involving President richard m. nixon is a classic example of this type of obstruction. A number of Nixon's top aides were convicted of obstruction of justice, including former attorney general john n. mitchell.A federal Grand Jury named Nixon himself as an unindicted coconspirator for the efforts to prevent disclosure of White House involvement in the 1972 Burglary of Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building complex in Washington, D.C.
Further readings:
Roush, Corey, and Rishi Varma. 1996. "Obstruction of Justice." American Criminal Law Review 33 (spring).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obstruction of Justice - Criminal Law
www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/crime-penalties/what-criminal-obstruction-what-penalties
by Deborah C. England
A bank teller is called into a conference room where a federal agent asks her some questions about a coworker. Based on the questions, the teller gathers that her coworker is under investigation for defrauding a bank customer. After leaving the interview, the teller sends a text to the coworker to warn him about the investigation. She’s doing a good deed by watching her coworker’s back, right?
Wrong. Her heart may be in the right place, but it could end up, with the rest of her, in jail or prison for committing criminal obstruction.
What is Criminal Obstruction?
Congress and state legislatures have written obstruction provisions into many different laws (for example, financial regulations, health and safety laws, and antitrust laws). As a result, there is no single “criminal obstruction” statute to look to. However, there are certain shared features of all of these provisions.
Generally speaking, a person commits criminal obstruction by engaging in any act that interferes with the investigation or prosecution of a crime. As defined by state and federal laws, such interference covers a lot of ground, from warning someone about a subpoena for documents to hiding a suspect from the authorities.
Many Ways to Obstruct
Certain types of interference may seem innocent or even kind (such as the teller warning her coworker), while others cross the legal line more obviously (such as destroying evidence). The greater the obstruction of justice the more severe the punishment for committing criminal obstruction.
Aiding a suspect
The lover or relative who helps a loved one accused of a crime hide from the cops is obstructing justice and can be charged. Even warning a coworker of an ongoing investigation (as in the above example) is probably obstruction because it gives the person under investigation a chance to destroy evidence, go on the lam, or even just prepare an alibi.
Hiding a suspect or helping to get rid of incriminating evidence is obvious obstruction. An example of such obstruction has gotten international media attention: A Romanian woman confessed to the media to burning several paintings by Picasso, Monet, Matisse, and other masters that her sons allegedly stole. She said she put the paintings in her oven in order to destroy the evidence of her sons’ crimes. (The woman later recanted, but was criminally charged.) If the mother did, in fact, burn the paintings, she would have engaged in criminal obstruction of justice under U.S. law.
Lying
Anyone who lies to authorities when questioned in the course of a criminal investigation commits obstruction of justice. (18 U.S.C. § 1505.) This includes lying in written answers to interrogatories, falsifying documents, and other means of delivering false information to investigators.
Giving false information to investigators also may be perjury if the misinformation is given in a grand jury proceeding or other setting where the person giving the false information has been placed under oath. For more information about perjury, see Perjury: Laws and Penalties.
FAMOUS OBSTRUCTIONS
Many of the mighty have fallen after being charged with obstruction of justice. President Richard Nixon resigned from office while under investigation for obstruction of justice (he was accused of paying off witnesses to hide the Watergate break-in). In 2011, a jury convicted former San Francisco Giant Barry Bonds of obstruction of justice for his statements to a grand jury about steroid use. (But in what was quite the legal saga, a federal appeals court overturned the Bonds conviction in 2015.)
In August of 2013, a federal grand jury indicted Dias Kadyrbayev and Azamat Tazhayakov, friends of Boston Marathon bombing defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, for conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and aiding and abetting. The charges stemmed from the friends’ allegedly trying to get rid of evidence of Tsarnaev’s complicity in the bombing, which killed three people and injured over 200. Prosecutors alleged that after the FBI posted photographs of the bombing suspects, Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov removed several items from Tsarnaev’s dorm room, including a laptop and a backpack. Kadyrbayev then allegedly threw the backpack, which contained fireworks, a jar of Vaseline, and other items, in a dumpster. Federal agents eventually found the backpack at a landfill. The two friends were convicted of obstruction of justice and conspiracy. A third friend was convicted of providing false statements to the FBI. (See "Materially False": Third Friend in Marathon Bombing Investigation Convicted.)
In certain cases, it's easier for the prosecution to prove obstruction than to prove the crime underlying the obstruction. The Bonds case is an example; there prosecutors pursued obstruction and perjury charges rather than charges for the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs.
Tampering with evidence
Anyone who intentionally destroys, alters, or otherwise tampers with physical evidence in a criminal investigation may be charged with obstruction of justice. For example, if the teller in the example above had doctored the customer’s account to hide the coworker’s misdeeds, she would have again committed obstruction of justice. (This obstruction would be more severe than simply warning the coworker of the investigation and would lead to greater punishment.)
Witness tampering is also a form of obstruction of justice. Anyone who threatens, coerces, tries to bribe, or otherwise attempts to interfere with a witness’s truthful testimony is guilty. (18 U.S.C. § 1510.)
Penalties
The penalty a person guilty of criminal obstruction could face depends upon the law under which the person was convicted. The penalties under state and federal laws range from misdemeanors to felonies. For example, a person who bribes or attempts to bribe a witness in a federal investigation may face up to five years in a federal penitentiary, a fine, or both. (18 U.S.C. § 1510.)
See a Lawyer
Even a person not directly involved in a crime under investigation may be charged with criminal obstruction. If you have been charged with criminal obstruction or have questions about the crime, consult an experienced criminal defense lawyer.
legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Obstruction+of+Justice
Obstruction may consist of any attempt to hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime. The acts by which justice is obstructed may include bribery, murder, intimidation, and the use of physical force against witnesses, law enforcement officers or court officials.
obstruction of justice
n. an attempt to interfere with the administration of the courts, the judicial system or law enforcement officers, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence, or interfering with an arrest. Such activity is a crime.
A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court.
The integrity of the judicial system depends on the participants' acting honestly and without fear of reprisals. Threatening a judge, trying to bribe a witness, or encouraging the destruction of evidence are examples of obstruction of justice. Federal and state laws make it a crime to obstruct justice.
Obstruction of justice in the federal courts is governed by a series of criminal statutes (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501–1517), which aim to protect the integrity of federal judicial proceedings as well as agency and congressional proceedings. Section 1503 is the primary vehicle for punishing those who obstruct or who endeavor to obstruct federal judicial proceedings.
Section 1503 proscribes obstructions of justice aimed at judicial officers, grand and petit jurors, and witnesses. The law makes it a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate against these participants in a criminal or civil proceeding. In addition, section 1503 makes it illegal to attempt the Bribery of an official to alter the outcome of a judicial proceeding.
Besides these specific prohibitions, section 1503 contains the Omnibus Clause, which states that a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice. This clause offers broad protection to the "due administration of justice." Federal courts have read this clause expansively to proscribe any conduct that interferes with the judicial process.
To obtain a conviction under section 1503, the government must prove that there was a pending federal judicial proceeding, the defendant knew of the proceeding, and the defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding.
Two types of cases arise under the Omnibus Clause: the concealment, alteration, or destruction of documents; and the encouraging or rendering of false testimony. Actual obstruction is not needed as an element of proof to sustain a conviction. The defendant's endeavor to obstruct justice is sufficient. "Endeavor" has been defined by the courts as an effort to accomplish the purpose the statute was enacted to prevent. The courts have consistently held that "endeavor" constitutes a lesser threshold of purposeful activity than a criminal "attempt."
Federal obstruction of justice statutes have been used to prosecute government officials who have sought to prevent the disclosure of damaging information. The Watergate scandal of the 1970s involving President richard m. nixon is a classic example of this type of obstruction. A number of Nixon's top aides were convicted of obstruction of justice, including former attorney general john n. mitchell.A federal Grand Jury named Nixon himself as an unindicted coconspirator for the efforts to prevent disclosure of White House involvement in the 1972 Burglary of Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building complex in Washington, D.C.
Further readings:
Roush, Corey, and Rishi Varma. 1996. "Obstruction of Justice." American Criminal Law Review 33 (spring).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Obstruction of Justice - Criminal Law
www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/crime-penalties/what-criminal-obstruction-what-penalties
by Deborah C. England
A bank teller is called into a conference room where a federal agent asks her some questions about a coworker. Based on the questions, the teller gathers that her coworker is under investigation for defrauding a bank customer. After leaving the interview, the teller sends a text to the coworker to warn him about the investigation. She’s doing a good deed by watching her coworker’s back, right?
Wrong. Her heart may be in the right place, but it could end up, with the rest of her, in jail or prison for committing criminal obstruction.
What is Criminal Obstruction?
Congress and state legislatures have written obstruction provisions into many different laws (for example, financial regulations, health and safety laws, and antitrust laws). As a result, there is no single “criminal obstruction” statute to look to. However, there are certain shared features of all of these provisions.
Generally speaking, a person commits criminal obstruction by engaging in any act that interferes with the investigation or prosecution of a crime. As defined by state and federal laws, such interference covers a lot of ground, from warning someone about a subpoena for documents to hiding a suspect from the authorities.
Many Ways to Obstruct
Certain types of interference may seem innocent or even kind (such as the teller warning her coworker), while others cross the legal line more obviously (such as destroying evidence). The greater the obstruction of justice the more severe the punishment for committing criminal obstruction.
Aiding a suspect
The lover or relative who helps a loved one accused of a crime hide from the cops is obstructing justice and can be charged. Even warning a coworker of an ongoing investigation (as in the above example) is probably obstruction because it gives the person under investigation a chance to destroy evidence, go on the lam, or even just prepare an alibi.
Hiding a suspect or helping to get rid of incriminating evidence is obvious obstruction. An example of such obstruction has gotten international media attention: A Romanian woman confessed to the media to burning several paintings by Picasso, Monet, Matisse, and other masters that her sons allegedly stole. She said she put the paintings in her oven in order to destroy the evidence of her sons’ crimes. (The woman later recanted, but was criminally charged.) If the mother did, in fact, burn the paintings, she would have engaged in criminal obstruction of justice under U.S. law.
Lying
Anyone who lies to authorities when questioned in the course of a criminal investigation commits obstruction of justice. (18 U.S.C. § 1505.) This includes lying in written answers to interrogatories, falsifying documents, and other means of delivering false information to investigators.
Giving false information to investigators also may be perjury if the misinformation is given in a grand jury proceeding or other setting where the person giving the false information has been placed under oath. For more information about perjury, see Perjury: Laws and Penalties.
FAMOUS OBSTRUCTIONS
Many of the mighty have fallen after being charged with obstruction of justice. President Richard Nixon resigned from office while under investigation for obstruction of justice (he was accused of paying off witnesses to hide the Watergate break-in). In 2011, a jury convicted former San Francisco Giant Barry Bonds of obstruction of justice for his statements to a grand jury about steroid use. (But in what was quite the legal saga, a federal appeals court overturned the Bonds conviction in 2015.)
In August of 2013, a federal grand jury indicted Dias Kadyrbayev and Azamat Tazhayakov, friends of Boston Marathon bombing defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, for conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and aiding and abetting. The charges stemmed from the friends’ allegedly trying to get rid of evidence of Tsarnaev’s complicity in the bombing, which killed three people and injured over 200. Prosecutors alleged that after the FBI posted photographs of the bombing suspects, Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov removed several items from Tsarnaev’s dorm room, including a laptop and a backpack. Kadyrbayev then allegedly threw the backpack, which contained fireworks, a jar of Vaseline, and other items, in a dumpster. Federal agents eventually found the backpack at a landfill. The two friends were convicted of obstruction of justice and conspiracy. A third friend was convicted of providing false statements to the FBI. (See "Materially False": Third Friend in Marathon Bombing Investigation Convicted.)
In certain cases, it's easier for the prosecution to prove obstruction than to prove the crime underlying the obstruction. The Bonds case is an example; there prosecutors pursued obstruction and perjury charges rather than charges for the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs.
Tampering with evidence
Anyone who intentionally destroys, alters, or otherwise tampers with physical evidence in a criminal investigation may be charged with obstruction of justice. For example, if the teller in the example above had doctored the customer’s account to hide the coworker’s misdeeds, she would have again committed obstruction of justice. (This obstruction would be more severe than simply warning the coworker of the investigation and would lead to greater punishment.)
Witness tampering is also a form of obstruction of justice. Anyone who threatens, coerces, tries to bribe, or otherwise attempts to interfere with a witness’s truthful testimony is guilty. (18 U.S.C. § 1510.)
Penalties
The penalty a person guilty of criminal obstruction could face depends upon the law under which the person was convicted. The penalties under state and federal laws range from misdemeanors to felonies. For example, a person who bribes or attempts to bribe a witness in a federal investigation may face up to five years in a federal penitentiary, a fine, or both. (18 U.S.C. § 1510.)
See a Lawyer
Even a person not directly involved in a crime under investigation may be charged with criminal obstruction. If you have been charged with criminal obstruction or have questions about the crime, consult an experienced criminal defense lawyer.