United States v Aguilar Case Brief Summary Law Case Explained
>> YOUR LINK HERE: ___ http://youtube.com/watch?v=HcD6m3gHFg8
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • United States v. Aguilar | 515 U.S. 593, 115 S.Ct. 2357, 132 L.Ed.2d 520 (1995) • In some cases, a criminal defendant’s attempt or intent to interfere with the justice system may constitute a crime, regardless of the outcome. In United States versus Aguilar, the Supreme Court grappled with defining limits on the application of broadly worded federal statutes. • Abe Chapman was distantly related by marriage to Robert Aguilar, a United States District Court judge. After Chapman’s associate, Michael Tham, was convicted of embezzlement, Chapman asked Aguilar for his assistance with Tham’s postconviction proceedings. After Aguilar spoke with the judge assigned to Tham’s case, he learned that the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or F B I, was investigating Tham and Chapman. The district’s chief judge warned Aguilar that Chapman’s name had appeared on a secret wiretap authorization. He advised Aguilar to cease communication with Chapman to avoid the appearance of impropriety. However, Aguilar told Chapman about the wiretap. Two months later, a grand jury began investigating a conspiracy to influence Tham’s case. The F B I interviewed Aguilar about the case, and he asked if he was the subject of a grand jury investigation. The agents replied that a grand jury was convening and would hear some evidence. When questioned, Aguilar lied about speaking with Tham’s judge and denied knowledge of the Chapman wiretap. He was subsequently prosecuted for obstruction of justice and disclosing a wiretap. • The district court found Aguilar guilty, but the Ninth Circuit reversed his convictions. The court held that because the grand jury never authorized the F B I’s investigation, Aguilar’s false statements didn’t obstruct the grand jury proceedings. The court also held that because the Chapman wiretap had expired, Aguilar’s disclosure didn’t violate the law. The Supreme Court granted cert. • Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-... • The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-... • Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... • Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... • Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom • Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom • #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
#############################