Page 31 - TPA Journal November December 2023
P. 31
abuse of discretion “to apply an erroneous view of year period, benefits in
the law.” excess of $10,000
under a Federal pro-
Hamilton raises many arguments for why gram involving a grant,
his conviction was unlawful, but we need only contract, subsidy, loan,
reach the first. The district court believed that § guarantee, or other
666 criminalized mere gratuities and did not form of Federal assis-
require a quid pro quo. Our court has not yet had tance. 18 U.S.C. §
the opportunity to address this question. We con- 666(a)–(b).
clude that § 666 does, in fact, require a quo; a quid
alone will not suffice. And the jury instruction that
the district court gave did not convey that. Thus,
Hamilton’s convictions must be vacated.
Section 666 criminalizes bribery concern- Section 666 grew out of a circuit split over
ing programs receiving federal funds. It provides another law. The general bribery statute, 18 U.S.C.
in relevant part: § 201, applied to “public official[s].” Percolation
of cases applying that statute led courts to a prob-
Whoever, if the circum- lem: Does the term “public official” include state
stance described in sub- and local officials? The Supreme Court granted
section (b) of this sec- certiorari in a case to resolve the split over this
tion exists— … (2) cor- issue, but once it did, Congress enacted § 666 to
ruptly gives, offers, or “extend federal bribery prohibitions to bribes
agrees to give anything offered to state and local officials employed by
of value to any person, agencies receiving federal funds,”
with intent to influence
or reward an agent of an Section 201 has two distinct subsections.
organization or of a Subsection (b) covers bribery, which “requires a
[local government], or showing that something of value was corruptly
any agency thereof, in given, offered, or promised to a public official”
connection with any with the intent “to influence any official act.”
business, transaction, or Subsection (c) covers illegal gratuity, which
series of transactions of “requires a showing that something of value was
such organization, gov- given, offered, or promised to a public official”
ernment, or agency “for or because of any official act performed or to
involving anything of be performed by such public official.”
value of $5,000 or When Congress passed and President Reagan
more; shall be fined signed what would become 18 U.S.C. § 666, it had
under this title, impris-
only one subsection. It criminalized something
oned not more than 10
like what is in subsection (c), the illegal-gratuity
years, or both. (b) The provision, with its “for or because of” language.
circumstance referred Two years later, Congress changed that provision
to in subsection (a) of by swapping out the “for or because of” language
this section is that the
for language like § 201(b), with its “intent to influ-
organization, govern-
ence” verbiage, and it added a requirement that the
ment, or agency giving be done “corruptly.”
receives, in any one
Nov/Dec 2023 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 27
