Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW
Beginning in June, Thomson Reuters News & Insight content will be available exclusively on WestlawNext®, as part of its Practitioner Insights offering. On June 21, the Thomson Reuters News & Insight website, iPhone® app and newsletters will be discontinued. See Frequently Asked Questions to learn more.

Legal

  •  
  •  

Courtroom, judge's view  No Credit iStock Photo

Attorney's advice is 'property' in extortion case: appeals court

7/2/2012 COMMENTS (0)

NEW YORK, July 2 (Reuters) - An attorney's legal counsel can be considered "property" to justify an extortion charge, a federal appeals court has ruled.

The 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals last week upheld the conviction of investment adviser Giridhar Sekhar for having attempted to extort Luke Bierman, the former general counsel for the New York State Comptroller.

Sekhar was convicted of attempted extortion and related federal crimes by a jury in 2011 for trying to blackmail Bierman into recommending that the comptroller invest $35 million worth of pension funds in a fund managed by Sekhar's company, Boston-based FA Technology Ventures.

Sekhar claimed to have evidence of Bierman's involvement in an extramarital affair with a co-worker and threatened to expose him.

Under the Hobbs Act, extortion means the "obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right." Courts have found that "property" can be any valuable right, such as the right to conduct business freely, that represents a "source or element of wealth," according to the appeals court's ruling.

Sekhar argued that Bierman's recommendation to the comptroller, which was not binding, could not be considered property, because it did not represent a source of wealth for Bierman.

But the court unanimously rejected that contention, ruling that Bierman's job was to provide legal counsel to the comptroller and that the value inherent in his advice would be compromised if delivered under threat.

"According to Sekhar, the government had to show that the General Counsel derived wealth from his ability to make the recommendation or that he would have suffered monetarily had Sekhar succeeded in forcing him to change his recommendation," wrote Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs for the three-judge panel. "The value and worth of a lawyer's services may be said generally to depend on freedom from conflict, including a conflict created by personal blackmail."

'COMPLETE OVERREACH'

Sekhar's lawyer, Paul Clyne, said the decision was simply "wrong" and that his client would appeal to the Supreme Court. According to Clyne, the decision was the first to find that a lawyer's advice could be construed as property.

"It's a complete overreach," he said. "It has no pecuniary effect on (Bierman) whatsoever."

Elizabeth Coombe, one of the assistant U.S. attorneys who handled the prosecution, said the government was "pleased" with the outcome.

Sekhar's company stood to earn at least $7 million from the investment, according to court papers. He represented himself during his trial and was sentenced to 15 months in prison by U.S. District Judge Thomas McAvoy.

Judges Peter Hall and Barrington Daniels Parker joined Jacobs' opinion.

The case is U.S. v. Giridhar Sekhar, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 11-4298.

For the prosecution: Elizabeth Coombe and Rajit Dosanjh, assistant U.S. attorneys for the Northern District of New York.

For Sekhar: Paul Clyne.

(Reporting by Joseph Ax)

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook  


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters