United States v. Sparks, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10932

Gary Sparks, grandfather of 13-year-old H.L., visited his daughter (H.L.’s mother) in jail three weeks before her criminal trial where H.L. was expected to testify.
After the jail visit, at dinner H.L. told Sparks she had spoken with investigators; Sparks told her, “you should only lie about the important stuff.”
H.L. later reported this exchange to authorities; the mother pleaded guilty and H.L. did not testify.
Government charged Sparks with witness tampering under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1) for corruptly persuading a witness to provide false testimony.
At trial the jury was instructed on “corruptly persuades” as requiring intentional conduct to bring about false or misleading testimony or to prevent testimony with hope of benefit; Sparks was convicted and appealed.
On appeal Sparks argued (1) insufficient evidence that his words constituted “corruptly persuading,” and (2) plain error in failing to give an instruction on the § 1512(e) affirmative defense (lawful conduct and sole intention to encourage truthful testimony).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that Sparks "corruptly persuaded" H.L. under § 1512(b)(1)	Government: statement + context (grandfather, 13‑year‑old, jail visit, timing before trial) permits conviction for attempting to corruptly persuade a witness	Sparks: eight words alone insufficient; persuasion requires more (act, threat, pleading, emotional appeal)	Affirmed: a directive to lie in context can constitute corrupt persuasion; jury could rationally find attempt to corruptly persuade
Failure to instruct on § 1512(e) affirmative defense (lawful conduct & sole intent to encourage truthful testimony)	Government: no instruction required unless evidence supports each element	Sparks: his testimony that he only comforted H.L. could support instruction	Affirmed: no error — evidence insufficient to show Sparks’ sole intent was to induce truthful testimony, so no reasonable basis for instruction

United States v. Weiss, 630 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 2011) (directive to lie can support § 1512 conviction)
United States v. Baldridge, 559 F.3d 1126 (10th Cir. 2009) (ordering others to lie during an investigation supports § 1512 conviction)
United States v. Khatami, 280 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2002) (instructions to lie to investigators may constitute corrupt persuasion)
United States v. Burns, 298 F.3d 523 (6th Cir. 2002) (telling a witness to give false testimony supports tampering conviction)
United States v. Pennington, 168 F.3d 1060 (8th Cir. 1999) (advising a witness to lie about payments supports conviction)
United States v. Al-Rekabi, 454 F.3d 1113 (10th Cir. 2006) (defendant not entitled to instruction lacking reasonable legal and factual basis)
United States v. Bailey, 444 U.S. 394 (U.S. 1980) (instruction on affirmative defense requires evidence supporting each element)