Robert Sorich v. United States
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 4004
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Sorich, McCarthy, and Slattery were convicted of mail fraud for a patronage scheme in City of Chicago hiring and promotion.
- Jury instructed that mail fraud could be based on deprivation of money/property or honest services.
- Skilling v. United States (2010) narrowed honest-services fraud to bribery/kickbacks; impact on this case later analyzed.
- Evidence showed a single scheme to secure City jobs/promotions through falsified processes and political influence, with Shakman decrees governing hiring.
- Indictment described a unified scheme to obtain money/property and the intangible right to honest services; district court deemed any honest-services error harmless.
- On collateral review, petitioners contend Skilling error requires reversal; district court and now court assess harmlessness under Brecht/Kotteakos standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Skilling error was harmless on collateral review | Sorich argues error affected verdict | United States argues error harmless due to coextensive theories | Harmless; no grave doubt about verdict |
| Whether jobs/promotions are money/property for mail fraud | Jobs constitute property of City | Property requirement met via money paid by City | Yes, jobs/property satisfy mail fraud |
| Whether evidence shows a single scheme, not separate honest-services scheme | Evidence supports separate honest-services theory | Evidence shows single money/property scheme | Single scheme; no independent honest-services theory |
| Whether honest-services theory affected verdict independent of money/property | Honest-services theory could sustain conviction | Honest-services theory premised on money/property; no independent impact | Harmless influence; did not alter outcome |
Key Cases Cited
- Skilling v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2896 (2010) (honest-services fraud limited to bribery/kickbacks; retroactive on collateral review)
- Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957) (jury instruction on alternative theories subject to harmless-error analysis)
- Hedgpeth v. Pulido, 555 U.S. 57 (2008) (per curiam; harmless-error framework for multi-theory verdicts)
- Turner v. United States, 693 F.3d 756 (7th Cir. 2012) (application of harmless-error standard on collateral review)
- Segal, 644 F.3d 364 (7th Cir. 2011) (coextensive theories; honest-services premised on money/property)
- United States v. Black, 625 F.3d 386 (7th Cir. 2010) (harmless error where private gain tied to money/property)
- Del Valle, 674 F.3d 696 (7th Cir. 2012) (jobs are property; money paid via salary thus property)
- Jackson, 546 F.3d 801 (7th Cir. 2008) (intent to defraud required for mail fraud conviction)