Criminal Practice – Abuse of Power – Federal-Program Theft – Civil Rights Violation – Probable Cause – Conspiracy Convictions – Prior-Acts Evidence

Listen to this article

The evidence was sufficient to charge defendants with, among other things, federal-program theft, for depriving a private citizen of his civil rights by arresting him without probable cause, and for knowingly impeded the investigation of the FBI by their false statements and material omission.

We affirmed the judgment of the district court.

This appeal challenged various aspects of a trial during which an elected county sheriff and two of his deputies were convicted and sentenced for abuses of power by which they enriched themselves and bullied others.

The government charged Sheriff Underwood, Chief Deputy Sprouse, and Lt. Neal with various violations of federal law in a 17-count indictment, and, after a two-week trial, the jury convicted them variously on 13 counts. From the district court’s judgment, defendants filed these appeals arguing, among other things, that, on some counts, the statutory elements were not proved; that the evidence was insufficient to support some convictions; and that the district court erred in admitting certain evidence at trial.

All three defendants contended first that the evidence failed to satisfy two elements of the crime of conviction under Count 9, charging them with federal-program theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(A), which punishes any agent of a state or local governmental entity who steals $5,000 or more from that entity if it has received more than $10,000 in federal benefits in any one year. Defendants maintained they did not violate § 666 because they were not “agents” of Chester County, as charged, and Chester County had not received more than $10,000 in federal benefits in the preceding year. We rejected defendants’ challenges to their convictions under Count 9 of the indictment, concluding that the evidence was sufficient to satisfy the $10,000- benefits element of § 666.

Next, Sheriff Underwood and Lt. Neal challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support their convictions for depriving a private citizen of his civil rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 by arresting him without probable cause. We concluded that the jury had sufficient evidence with which to convict both Sheriff Underwood and Lt. Neal on Count 2, and we rejected their arguments suggesting otherwise.

Next, Chief Deputy Sprouse and Lt. Neal challenged the sufficiency of the evidence offered to support their convictions under Count 5 for impeding a federal investigation under 18 U.S.C. § 1519. We concluded the evidence was sufficient for the jury to have found that both Chief Deputy Sprouse and Lt. Neal knowingly impeded the investigation of the FBI by their false statements and material omission.

Relying on the arguments that they made with respect to the substantive convictions, all three defendants challenged their conspiracy convictions, arguing that if we overturn the substantive convictions, we must also overturn the conspiracy convictions based on them. Because we affirmed the convictions of the substantive crimes, we likewise upheld the conspiracy convictions.

For their final challenge to their convictions, defendants contended the court abused its discretion in admitting certain prior-acts evidence during trial. In light of the conspiracy and federal-program theft counts, we concluded the court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the challenged evidence, either as intrinsic to the charges or for knowledge and intent.

Affirmed.

U.S. v. Underwood (Lawyers’ Weekly No. 001-028-24, 32 pp.) (Paul V. Niemeyer, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina at Rock Hill (J. Michelle Childs, J.) Argued: Clarence Rauch Wise, Greenwood, South Carolina, for appellants; Sonja M. Ralston, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for appellee; On Brief: Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for appellant George Alexander Underwood; Emily Deck Harrill, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for appellant Robert Andrew Sprouse; Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Lisa H. Miller, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Appellate Section, Corey R. Amundson, Chief, Public Integrity Section, Criminal Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for appellee. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit