9th Circuit Sheds Light on Elements of Honest Services Deprivation

How much of a commitment in exchange for campaign contributions constitutes a violation of federal laws relating to the honest services of public officials?  The 9th Circuit shed light on that issue in US v. Inzunza, a case involving former San Diego elected officials.

Referring to the "polluted atmosphere of campaign contributions," the court found that an official violates the law when the official explicitly promises to take official action upon receiving a campaign contribution.  The fact that the promise was made in exchange for the contribution does not need to be explicit; moreover the connection between the contribution and the promise can be shown by circumstantial evidence. (See discussion at page 12153 of opinion)

Applying this standard, the court upheld the jury's conviction of one elected official and also upheld the trial court's setting aside the jury's verdicts with respect to another.  The court stayed (postponed action on) its decision in light of the pendency of Weyrauch in the United States Supreme Court.