Keith Mack
Obstruction of justice is a broad term that covers various criminal acts that interfere with the administration and due process of the law, including any criminal proceeding or investigation. While there is no single statute for obstruction of justice, it is a crime at both the federal and state levels, and it can result in significant imprisonment. Federal laws criminalize witness tampering and retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, and theft of court records. State laws vary, with California, for example, criminalizing the interference with police or judicial processes, such as resisting or obstructing a police officer. Obstruction of justice charges are often pursued vigorously by law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges, who take their roles in upholding the justice system seriously.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Definition | Interfering with the administration and due process of the law, including any criminal proceeding or investigation |
| Type of crime | White collar crime |
| Applicable laws | Federal laws, state laws, and common law |
| Federal laws | Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code, Omnibus Clause |
| State laws | Vary widely; California state law provides criminal punishments for acts that are categorized as obstruction of justice, even without a specific statute |
| Common law | Contempt of court |
| Examples | Witness tampering, retaliation, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, assault on a process server, theft of court records, lying to investigators, influencing witnesses, concealing documents |
| Defendant requirements | Must act knowingly |
| Punishment | More severe sentence if convicted of a crime and found to have obstructed justice; an obstruction finding adds two levels to the offender's sentence |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Lying to investigators
Obstruction of justice is a broad term that covers a wide range of actions that interfere with government investigations or legal proceedings. In the United States, crimes constituting obstruction of justice are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which includes provisions covering witness tampering, destruction of evidence, and assault on a process server, among other specific crimes. One of the broadest provisions, known as the Omnibus Clause, states that anyone who "corruptly...endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" in connection with a pending court proceeding is subject to punishment.
The consequences of lying to investigators can be severe, and those found guilty of obstruction of justice may face additional penalties on top of any underlying charges they may be facing. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant convicted of any crime who is also found to have obstructed justice can receive a more severe sentence. For example, an obstruction finding can add up to 68 months of prison time to the offender's sentence.
In some cases, individuals may be charged with obstruction of justice even if they are not directly lying to investigators. This can include encouraging others to conceal evidence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, as in the case of Bill Clinton's impeachment in 1998. Celebrities such as Martha Stewart and R. Kelly have also been charged with obstruction of justice for lying to investigators or conspiring with witnesses, respectively.
It is important to note that the laws regarding obstruction of justice can vary between states, and the federal system is significantly different from the state system. As such, it is crucial to seek legal counsel from an experienced attorney if one is facing charges or is under investigation for potential obstruction of justice.
Fitbit at Work: Can Your Boss Legally Do That?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Witness tampering
In the United States, witness tampering is specifically addressed in 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which is part of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 (VWPA). This statute provides extensive protection for witnesses, victims, and informants against attempts to obstruct justice by tampering with them. It covers a wide range of actions that could interfere with an individual's ability to report crimes, provide testimony, or participate in various proceedings, including Congressional or executive agency inquiries.
The federal crime of witness tampering under 18 U.S.C. § 1512 includes several variations. It covers tampering with a witness, victim, or informant, and it also includes separate federal crimes for retaliating against a witness and trying to influence a juror. The statute is broad and applies to proceedings before Congress, executive departments, administrative agencies, and civil and criminal cases. The degree of punishment for witness tampering is proportional to the seriousness of the criminal behavior. For example, if the crime involves using physical force or results in the death of the witness, the punishment can be up to 30 years in federal prison or even life imprisonment.
Understanding PA Laws: Can a Lease Override State Law?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Jury tampering
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 in Great Britain allows for non-jury trials in cases where jury tampering has occurred or is deemed a potential risk. This provision was invoked in 2009 by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, in a landmark ruling that resulted in the first-ever criminal trial to be held without a jury. The case involved four men accused of armed robbery at Heathrow Airport, and the decision was made after three previous juries failed to reach a verdict or were discharged.
In the United States, jury tampering is addressed in Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which outlines various crimes constituting obstruction of justice. It is considered a serious offence, and those found guilty can face severe penalties. Notable cases of jury tampering in the US include the convictions of Louisiana Agriculture and Forestry Commissioner Gil Dozier, trade union leader Jimmy Hoffa, and former West Virginia Governor William Wallace Barron.
The Supreme Court case of Remmer v. United States established that jury tampering in criminal cases is presumptively prejudicial. This means that the accused party in a jury tampering allegation has the burden of proving that there is no reasonable possibility that the tampering impacted the jury's impartiality.
The means by which individuals attempt to tamper with juries can vary. It can involve discrediting potential jurors to ensure they are not selected, bribing or intimidating selected jurors, or making unauthorised contact to introduce prohibited outside information and argue for a mistrial. In some cases, individuals have been charged with jury tampering for distributing pamphlets and flyers informing jurors of their rights and obligations, including the right to vote according to their conscience, regardless of the judge's instructions.
Consumer Power: Changing Laws in the US
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![[Luke Rosiak] Obstruction of Justice: How The Deep State Risked National Security to Protect The Democrats Hardcover【2019】 by Luke Rosiak](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/91pYSoMQNZL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
Destruction of evidence
Obstruction of justice is the intentional interference with government investigations or court proceedings. It is a criminal offense under both federal and state law, and thousands of people are imprisoned for it every year. The most common federal obstruction of justice charges are brought against people who willfully and knowingly interfere with a government investigation or court proceeding. This includes witness tampering, destroying evidence, and bribing the jury.
The destruction of evidence is one of the most common forms of obstruction of justice. It involves intentionally tampering with physical evidence in a criminal investigation or prosecution. This can include altering, destroying, or concealing records, documents, or other tangible objects with the intent to obstruct or impede a court proceeding. The penalty for this type of obstruction can be as much as 20 years in prison.
The destruction of evidence can take many forms. For example, in 2004, investment banker Frank Quattrone was sentenced to 18 months for obstruction of justice and witness tampering after forwarding an email suggesting employees "clean up files" during an investigation. Although his conviction was later overturned, the email was interpreted as encouraging others to destroy evidence. In another case, a Romanian woman confessed to burning several paintings by famous artists that her sons had allegedly stolen. She claimed she did it to destroy evidence of their crimes. While she later recanted, she was still charged with criminal obstruction of justice under U.S. law.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 strengthened the obstruction laws regarding the destruction of evidence before an investigation or proceeding. Additionally, under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant convicted of any crime may face a more severe sentence if they are found to have obstructed justice by impeding the investigation or prosecution of their crimes. This can result in an additional 68 months of prison time.
To avoid obstruction charges, it is important to be aware of the common charges prosecutors file for obstruction of justice, such as witness tampering, retaliation, and destroying or hiding evidence. Obstruction of justice charges can have serious consequences, and it is always best to seek legal advice from criminal defense counsel regarding any court case.
Canada's GCP Law: What You Need to Know
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$12.61 $25.99
Coercion of court officials
One of the key statutes regarding coercion of court officials is 18 U.S.C. § 1503, which makes it illegal to "corruptly" influence, intimidate, or impede a juror or officer of the court through threats or force. This statute carries significant weight, with punishments reaching over 20 years imprisonment in extreme cases.
Another relevant statute is 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which prohibits any harm, threats, or influence towards a witness, as well as the destruction or concealment of evidence. Violation of this statute can result in up to 30 years of imprisonment.
Obstruction of justice can also occur through the influencing or injuring of court officers or jurors, obstruction of court orders, criminal investigations, or state or local law enforcement. These actions are considered a serious interference with the due administration of justice and are subject to punishment.
In terms of sentencing, a defendant convicted of any crime who is also found to have obstructed justice can face more severe penalties. This includes an additional 68 months of prison time in some cases.
Enforcement of State Laws: Who Holds the Power?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Obstruction of justice is when someone interferes with the administration and due process of the law, including any criminal proceeding or investigation.
Examples include tampering with a witness, victim, or informant, retaliating against a witness, victim, or informant, and influencing or attempting to improperly influence a juror.
Obstruction of justice charges are often pursued by prosecutors because they are often easier to prove than the underlying crime that investigators were pursuing. Obstruction of justice can also lead to a more severe sentence if the defendant is found to have obstructed justice by impeding the investigation or prosecution of their crimes.
Notable cases include the impeachment of Bill Clinton in 1998, which included allegations that Clinton tried to influence the testimony of witnesses and encouraged the concealment of evidence. Another example is the case against former President Trump, which involved 31 counts of "willful retention of national defense information" and other counts related to the obstruction of justice.
