Marinello v. United States
United States Supreme Court
138 S. Ct. 1101, 200 L. Ed. 2d 356 (2018)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) began investigating the tax activities of Carlo Marinello (defendant). Marinello was indicted by the government (plaintiff) in federal district court for violations of criminal tax statutes, including the omnibus clause of 26 U.S.C. § 7212(a), which prohibited obstructing or impeding the due administration of the tax code corruptly or by force. A violation of § 7212(a) was a felony. At trial, the judge did not give a jury instruction stating that to convict Marinello under the omnibus clause, the jury must find that Marinello knew that he was under investigation at the time of the obstructive act and that he corruptly intended to interfere with the IRS’s administration of the tax code. The jury convicted Marinello on all counts, including the violation of the omnibus clause. Marinello appealed, arguing that the prosecution did not show that he had attempted to interfere with a particular pending proceeding that he knew was ongoing. The court of appeals affirmed Marinello’s conviction, holding that a defendant did not have to be aware of a specific pending IRS proceeding during an act of interference to be convicted for violating the omnibus clause. Marinello requested a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court, which was granted.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Breyer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.