United States v. Spellissy
438 F. App'x 780
11th Cir.2011Background
- Spellissy (felon) and SDI petitioned for a writ of error coram nobis after conviction for conspiracy to defraud the United States and related bribery and honest-services wire fraud offenses; Spellissy and SDI contend Skilling narrows honest-services liability to non-criminal conduct; the district court denied the petition; the court reviews for abuse of discretion and applies coram nobis standards as last-resort relief; Skilling held honest-services fraud does not cover undisclosed self-dealing or conflict-of-interest schemes; the court concludes any error was harmless and the petition fails on the merits and the district court’s discretion was not abused.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether coram nobis is available after sentence completion | Spellissy/SDI argue coram nobis remedies necessary for Skilling-related issue | Government maintains coram nobis is appropriate only in compelling, last-resort circumstances | Petition denied; coram nobis not appropriate here |
| Whether Skilling narrows honest-services liability affecting this conviction | Skilling limits §1346 to bribe/kickback schemes | Convictions rested on bribery/kickbacks; Skilling does not render them non-criminal | No reversible error; convictions premised on bribery survive Skilling narrowing |
| Whether any Yates-type error was harmless | Error potentially affected verdict | Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under collateral review standards | Any such error was harmless; no fundamental defect to warrant coram nobis |
Key Cases Cited
- Skilling v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2889 (U.S. 2010) (narrowed honest-services fraud to bribe/kickback schemes)
- United States v. Mills, 221 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2000) (coram nobis available when no other relief and after sentence)
- United States v. Brown, 117 F.3d 471 (11th Cir. 1997) (coram nobis to address wrongful convictions after sentence)
- Alikhani v. United States, 200 F.3d 732 (11th Cir. 2000) (requirements for coram nobis: no other relief and fundamental error)
- Peter v. United States, 310 F.3d 709 (11th Cir. 2002) (exceptional coram nobis relief where conduct later deemed non-criminal)
- Hedgpeth v. Pulido, 555 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2008) (harmless error standard in collateral review for constitutional claims)
- Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619 (U.S. 1993) (harmless error standard in collateral review)
- Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (U.S. 1957) (constitutional errors subject to harmless/error analysis)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967) (harmless-error standard on direct appeal)
- Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (U.S. 1946) (standard for harmless error analysis)
- Moody v. United States, 874 F.2d 1575 (11th Cir. 1989) (burden to show entitlement to relief in coram nobis)