The Burger Court OpinionWriting Database

United States v. Gillock445 U.S. 360 (1980)

Paul J. Wahlbeck, George Washington UniversityJames F. Spriggs, II, Washington University in St. LouisForrest Maltzman, George Washington University

4e<To: Mr. Justice Brennan

Mr. Justice StewartMr. Justice WhiteMr. Justice MarshallMr. Justice Blackmunmr. Justice Powell °Mr. Justice RehnquistMr„ . Justice Stevens,

from: The Chief Justice AMAR 8 198*:;

Circulated: =

Recirculated:

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

United States, Petitioner, On Writ of Certiorari to the Unitedv. States Court of Appeals for the

Edgar H. Gillock. Sixth Circuit.

[February —, 1980]0,1

1-4■-t

1-4

1-4cr3I-10

fts

cri

1 Compare United States v. DiCarlo, 565 F. 2d 802 (CAI 1977), cert.denied, 435 U. S. 924 (1978), and United States v. Craig, 537 F. 2d 957(CA7) (en bane), cert. denied, 429 U. S. 999 (1976), with In re GrandJury Proceedings, 563 F. 2d 577 (CA3 1977).

2 The count based on 18 U. S. C. § 1952 was subsequently dismissed bythe District Court,

1st DRAFT

No. 78-1455

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER delivered the opinion of theCourt.

We granted certiorari to resolve a conflict in the Circuitsover whether the federal courts in a federal criminal prosecu-tion should recognize a legislative privilege barring the intro-duction of evidence of the legislative acts of a state legislatorcharged with taking bribes or otherwise obtaining moneyunlawfully through exploitation of his official position.' 441U. S. 942 (1979).

Respondent Edgar H. Gillock , was indicted on August 12,1976, in the Western District of Tennessee on five counts ofobtaining money under color of official right in violation of18 U. S. C. § 1951, one count of using an interstate facility todistribute a bribe in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1952, 2 and onecount of participating in an enterprise through a pattern ofracketeering activity in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1962. Theindictment charged Gillock. then a Tennessee state senatorand practicing attorney, with accepting money as a fee for

STYLISTIC CHANGES AS NT A RICED: 5 -, -1

4.0."To: Mr. Justice Brennan

Mr. Justice StewartMr. Justice WhiteMr. Justice MarshallMr. Justice BlackmunMr. Justice PowellMr. Justice RehnquistMr. Justice Stevens

From: The Chief Justice

Circulated:

- -1 culateriMAR 14 1980

2nd DRAFT

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 78-1455

United States, Petitioner, On Writ of Certiorari to the Unitedv. States Court of Appeals for the

Edgar H. Gillock. Sixth Circuit.

[February —, 1980]

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER delivered the opinion of theCourt.

We granted certiorari to resolve a conflict in the Circuitsover whether the federal courts in a federal criminal prosecu-tion should recognize a legislative privilege barring the intro-duction of evidence of the legislative acts of a state legislatorcharged with taking bribes or otherwise obtaining moneyunlawfully through exploitation of his official position.' 441U. S. 942 (1979).

Respondent Edgar H. Gillock was indicted on August 12,1976, in the Western District of Tennessee on five counts ofobtaining money under color of official right in violation of18 U. S. C. § 1951, one count of using an interstate facility todistribute a bribe in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1952. = and onecount of participating in an enterprise through a pattern ofracketeering activity in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1962. Theindictment charged Gillock, then a Tennessee state senatorand practicing attorney, with accepting money as a fee for

1 Compare United States v. DiCarlo, 565 F. 2d 802 (CAI 1977). cert.denied, 435 U. S. 924 (1978), and United States v. Craig, 537 F. 2d 957(CA7) (en bane), cert. denied, 429 U. S. 999 (1976), with In re GrandJury Proceedings, 563 F. 2d 577 (CA3 1977).

2 The count based on 18 U. S. C. § 1952 was subsequently dismissed bythe District Court..

Cronul M tiltbtitrb S+taltsPuffiringtort, 'A). 04% 20,5)0

CHAN BERG OF

THE CHIEF JUSTICE

March 25, 1980

MEMORANDUM TO THE CONFERENCE

RE: Cases held for No. 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

One case has been held for Gillock: No. 78-1347 - Wall & McAvoy v. United States. DENY

Petitioners, Illinois state representatives, agreed for a"fee" to introduce legislation in the Illinois General Assemblyto authorize the use of private employment agencies to placereturning Vietnam veterans. The prosecution introducedevidence that petitioners had introduced such a bill in thestate legislature; petitioners were convicted under the HobbsAct. The CA7 rejected petitioners' contention that theintroduction of evidence of their legislative acts wasimproper, relying on its en banc opinion in United States v.Craig, 537 F.2d 957 (1976).

The issue presented appears to be precisely that decided inGillock. The two other issues presented, whether there was asufficient nexus to interstate commerce to support theconviction and whether the Hobbs Act applies to cases of simplebribery, do not merit review.

I WILL VOTE TO DENY.

Sf qrr tnu Qjvtai of tPAtitth $tattoWao ingtrat, Q. 2r1A4g

CPIAMISIERS Or

USTICE Wm. J. BRENNAN, JR.March 7, 1980

RE: No. 78-1455 United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please join me.

Sincerely,

The Chief Justice

cc: The Conference

upl rine quart of tiTtgnitztr AbdtoPa.oiringtott, 713. al. 2L14g

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE POTTER STEWART

March 10, 1980

Re: 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

I am glad to join your opinion for theCourt.

Sincerely yours,

The Chief Justice

Copies to the Conference

Pvl

0=

1-3

ro

c-)7:1

ro1-4

=

0

ro

1-4

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE BYRON R. WHITE March 10, 1980

;-51tprrint of Hit Thrittb- .tatto

Paskirustan, P. (q. 2rrJ4g

Re: 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief,

Please join me.

Sincerely yours,

The Chief Justice

Copies to the Conference

cmc

roO

Psi

0

1-3

0r,

1-31-40

cn

0ti

trl

cn

Je

ro

1-4

)-4O

Cd

Oray

1-4

C/3cn

.§ttprente qottrt of HIT rnittb ,:tzt.tro

p. (q. 2ffg4g

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE THURGOOD MARSHALL

March 10, 1980

Re: No, 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please join me.

Sincerely,

77/14..T,M.

The Chief Justice

cc: The Conference

2,14/Trutt Court of tilt linitttr JkattoliTzuckingtolt, p. cc. tog4g

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE HARRY A. BLACKMUN March 10, 1980

Re: No. 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please join me.

Sincerely,

Odt

The Chief Justice

cc: The Conference

.2113-r-gint (grad of Ott linita 'talusVastttttjtou, p. 2rig4g

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE HARRY A. BLACKMUN March 10, 1980

Re: No. 78-1455 - United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please join me.

Sincerely,

dt

The Chief Justice

cc: The Conference

[note to the Chief Justice]

I have one personal suggestion. Would it not be advis-able to recite that the Sixth Circuit panel was divided inits vote. I always like to give the dissenting judge below,when he has done a good job standing alone, a little boost.This could be worked in easily on page 5 of your opinion.

January 23, 1980

78-1455 U.S. v. Gillock

Dear Bill:

This will confirm my understanding that you will dowhatever is necessary to register our dissent in the abovecase.

Unless the Court opinion contains doctrine that wethink must be rebutted, I would be quite happy - as yousuggest - to pay Chief Judge Edwards the accolade of adoptinghis dissent.

Sincerely,

Mr. Justice Rehnquist

lfp/ss

2•Itprtint t aunt of t PtittiStateg

IgaskirtOtort, P. C 2.ug4g

C NAM SCRS OF

JUSTICE LEWIS F. POWELL, JR.

March 13, 1980

78-1455 United States v: Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please add my name to that of Bill Rehnquist to thesentence saying we should affirm the judgment of the Court ofAppeals.

Sincerely,

The Chief Justice

lfp/ss

cc: The Conference

-5 itprretttt Qiiintrt tr-f gniftt(1atro

pa-54 4144m, arg4g

CHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST

March 13, 1980

Re: No. 78-1455 United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Would you add at the conclusion of your opinion thefollowing:

"For the reasons stated by Chief JudgeEdwards in his opinion in this case forthe Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit,I would affirm the judgment of that court."

Sincerely,

The Chief Justice

Copies to the Conference

1;...1AMMOSISOMMOROMMMNIPSa

.§Itpteutt qourt of tkr raitfir Mates

aokingtart, 19 Q. 2.0g4gCHAMBERS OF

JUSTICE JOHN PAUL STEVENS

March 10, 1980

Re: 78-1455 -'United States v. Gillock

Dear Chief:

Please join me.

Respectfully,

The Chief Justice

Copies to the Conference

Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8Page 9Page 10Page 11Page 12Page 13Page 14