United States v. Steven Terry
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3056
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Steven Terry, a Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas judge, was accused of accepting benefits from auditor Frank Russo in exchange for official actions.
- Russo, under FBI investigation, pledged political and staff support to Terry in Terry’s reelection bid.
- Terry instructed a magistrate to deny bank summary-judgment motions at Russo’s behest; actions occurred without case-file review.
- Russo’s PAC and campaign materials provided Terry with campaign funding and support during the relevant period.
- A tape captured Terry agreeing to deny the motions after Russo’s request, evidencing an exchange of influence for favors.
- Terry was convicted on Counts One, Three, and Four (with acquittals on Counts Two and Five); sentenced to concurrent 63-month terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Skilling indictment sufficiency under 18 U.S.C. §1346 | Terry argues Skilling requires state-law duty | District court correctly applied Skilling to require only bribery/kickback | Indictment valid under Skilling |
| Bribe definition and jury instructions | Bribery requires explicit quid pro quo; instructions too broad | Agreement to accept value in exchange for official acts suffices; no need for explicit quid pro quo | Jury instructions correctly conveyed quid pro quo as required |
| Sufficiency of evidence of bribery agreement | No formal agreement; lacking sufficient evidence | Circumstantial evidence shows corrupt bargain and agreement | Evidence supports finding of bribery agreement and honest services fraud |
Key Cases Cited
- Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010) (requires proof of bribery/kickback to sustain honest services fraud)
- Abbey v. United States, 560 F.3d 513 (6th Cir. 2009) (agreement to accept value to influence official action suffices)
- McCormick v. United States, 500 U.S. 257 (1991) (intent of agreement and exchange; jury determinations on intent)
- United States v. Brewster, 408 U.S. 501 (1972) (extortion/bribery distinctions; payment for official actions)
- Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255 (1992) (consideration of motives and circumstances in bribery cases)
- Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) (campaign contributions as potential bribes depending on context)