american immigration lawyers association eb-5 ... - AILA webCLE

5. Acts Proscribed Under § 1503.the Courthouse: Mens Rea, DocumentDestruction, and the Federal Obstruction ofJustice Statue, 67 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 570, 588(1992). On DeMarco’s view, the Neiswenederapproach could be used to criminalizerecklessness or negligence as in the case of anattorney who inadvertently destroys or fails toadequately safeguard documents that have beensubpoenaed. Id. at 598-605. However,prosecutorial discretion, in practice, hasminimized the chances of this occurring. Id. at605-08(3) Generally, the intent requirement is satisfied ifthe government shows that the defendantknowingly and intentionally undertook anaction from which an obstruction of justice wasa reasonably foreseeable result. See UnitedStates v. Cueto, 151 F.3d 620, 630–31 (7th Cir.1998) (upheld lawyer’s conviction forconspiracy and obstruction of justice for usingcourt processes to interfere with a federalinvestigation of the illegal gamblingoperations), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1016 (1999);Silverman, 745 F.2d 1386, 1393 (attempt byattorney to solicit $25,000 from his client underpretext of using it as bribe to guarantee clientwould receive probation upon pleading guilty is“endeavor” to obstruct justice justifyingattorney’s conviction for violating § 1503.)(a)Conviction under § 1503 can result from “subtlesuggestions.” In United States v. Tranakos, 911 F.2d 1422(10th Cir. 1990), the court affirmed the conviction of anattorney for obstructing a witness’ grand jury testimony forsmiling and saying suggestively to the witness (in a case inwhich the ownership of trusts was at issue), “Well, you don’town any trusts, do you?” followed by, “You don’t have anybank accounts in Montana, do you?” Id. at 1431. The courtheld that “One who proposes to another that the other lie in ajudicial proceeding is guilty of obstructing justice . . . The23us\JUCEARO\7667714.1