U.S. v. Blagojevich

Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant’s conviction on charges of attempted extortion, corrupt solicitation of funds and wire fraud, except for five counts that concerned allegations that defendant proposed to appoint Valerie Jarrett to Senate in exchange for Presidential appointment of defendant to Cabinet post. Ct. found that defendant’s conduct in this regard was akin to “political logrolling,” i.e., proposal to trade one public act for another, which was not covered by any charged offense. However, govt. may re-prosecute defendant on said charges since jury could have concluded that defendant had asked President-Elect Obama for private sector job or funds that he could control in exchange for favorable appointment to Senate. Ct. further rejected defendant’s claim that he was entitled to “good faith” instruction if he believed that his conduct was lawful, since none of applicable charged offenses had “willful” element that made knowledge of law essential. Moreover, although prosecutor erred during closing argument by commenting on lack of evidence supporting defendant’s claim that he always intended to appoint Lisa Madigan to Senate seat and by making hearsay reference to testimony of one witness, said errors were harmless in light of overwhelming nature of defendant’s guilt. Finally, defendant was entitled to new sentencing hearing where instant 168-month sentence was based in part on now-reversed convictions, although Ct. rejected defendant’s argument that instant sentence was too long.