United States v. Bruno
531 F. App'x 47
2d Cir.2013Background
- Bruno was convicted in 2009 of two counts of honest services mail fraud based on failure to disclose conflicts of interest as a NY State Senator.
- The Supreme Court later in Skilling restricted honest services fraud to bribery/kickback schemes, leading to vacatur of Bruno’s convictions.
- A superseding indictment charged two counts of honest services mail fraud under a bribery/kickback theory using the same facts.
- Bruno moved to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds for retrial under the quid pro quo theory; the district court denied the motion.
- The Second Circuit reviews the district court’s double jeopardy ruling de novo and ultimately affirms the district court’s denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retrial on a quid pro quo theory is barred as double jeopardy because the theory was abandoned | Bruno argues the government abandoned the quid pro quo theory at the first trial. | Bruno contends abandonment bars retrial on that theory. | No; abandonment does not bar retrial under the circumstances. |
| Whether collateral estoppel prevents retrial based on acquittals | Bruno asserts acquittals preclude retrial on the same issue. | Bruno relies on collateral estoppel to block retrial for the scheme. | Collateral estoppel does not apply; convictions on related counts imply the jury found the requisite intent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Saylor v. Cornelius, 845 F.2d 1401 (6th Cir. 1988) (abandonment theory not adopted as a bar to retrial in this circuit)
- United States v. Citron, 853 F.2d 1055 (2d Cir. 1988) (acquittal with related conviction does not preclude retrial; conviction affects inference of facts)
- Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1970) (collateral estoppel framework in ultimate fact determinations)
- Richardson v. United States, 468 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1984) (double jeopardy principles governing retrial and theory choices)
- United States v. Witting, 575 F.3d 1085 (10th Cir. 2009) (Saylor questioned; not adopted across circuits)
- United States v. Davis, 873 F.2d 900 (6th Cir. 1989) (discusses abandonment theory in context of double jeopardy)