[House Report 104-549]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
104th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 104-549
_______________________________________________________________________
AMENDING TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, WITH RESPECT TO WITNESS
RETALIATION, WITNESS TAMPERING AND JURY TAMPERING
_______
May 1, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. McCollum, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 3120]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 3120) to amend title 18, United States Code, with
respect to witness retaliation, witness tampering and jury
tampering, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
CONTENTS
Page
The Amendment.................................................... 2
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 3
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 3
Vote of the Committee............................................ 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight..................... 4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 4
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 4
Inflationary Impact Statement.................................... 5
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion....................... 5
Agency Views..................................................... 6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 6
Dissenting Views................................................. 8
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
That title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in section 1513--
(A) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection
(d); and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) If the retaliation occurred because of attendance at or
testimony in a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment which
may be imposed for the offense under this section shall be the higher
of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have
been imposed for any offense charged in such case.'';
(2) in section 1512, by adding at the end the following:
``(i) If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a
trial of a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be
imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided
by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense
charged in such case.''; and
(3) in section 1503(a), by adding at the end the following:
``If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a
trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this
section involves the threat of physical force or physical
force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed
for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided
by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any
offense charged in such case.''.
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 3120, introduced by Rep. Jon Fox of Pennsylvania,
makes three changes to title 18 in order to increase the
maximum penalties which may be imposed for jury and witness
retaliation and tampering.
First, this bill amends the title 18 provisions relating to
retaliation against witnesses, victims, or informants (18
U.S.C. Sec. 1513). Current law provides for a maximum penalty
of 10 years imprisonment for persons convicted of this crime.
This bill will amend that law to provide that if the
retaliation occurred because of attendance at a criminal trial,
the maximum punishment would be the higher of that in the
present statute, or the maximum term for any offense charged in
the criminal case to which the retaliation related.
Second, this bill would amend the title 18 provision
relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or informant (18
U.S.C. Sec. 1512). Current law provides for a maximum penalty
of ten years if the act involves intimidation or the threat of
physical force, or one year if the act constitutes
``harassment.'' If the act involved murder, the maximum
punishment is death. If the act involved is attempted murder,
the maximum punishment is 20 years imprisonment. This bill
would provide that if the offense occurred in connection with a
criminal trial, the maximum punishment would be the higher of
that provided by the present statute or the maximum term for
any offense charged in the criminal case in question.
Finally, this bill would amend the title 18 provision
relating to jury tampering and influencing or injuring court
officials (18 U.S.C. Sec. 1503). Under current law the maximum
punishment is 10 years imprisonment. However, if the act
involved killing a person, the maximum punishment is death. If
the act involved is attempted killing, the maximum punishment
is 20 years imprisonment. This bill provides that if the
offense occurred in connection with a criminal trial and
involved the use of physical force or threat of physical force,
the maximum punishment shall be the higher of that provided by
the present statute or the maximum term for any offense charged
in the criminal case in question.
Background and Need for the Legislation
In recent years, criminal sentences have increased in
response to the scourge of drugs and violent crime, yet the
penalties for retaliating against or tampering with witnesses,
jurors, and court officials in criminal cases have remained
unchanged. Some federal and state prosecutors blame witness
intimidation and juror tampering for the falling conviction
rates in some parts of the country.
Indeed, under current law, a defendant facing a federal
criminal sentence of ten years or more may believe he or she is
better off trying to influence the outcome of the trial by
intimidating a witness, or tampering with a juror or court
officer, because the maximum punishment for such crime is
generally 10 years in prison.
In order to deter criminals and their associates from
attempting to illegally influence the outcome of a criminal
trial, H.R. 3120 increases the maximum penalty for witness
intimidation, and tampering with a juror or court official, so
that it equals the maximum penalty for the crime being tried in
the case. As a result, criminals will no longer be tempted to
illegally influence their trial in the hope that, even if
caught, their punishment for the act of intimidation or
tampering will be less than what they would have faced had they
been convicted on the original charges.
The integrity of the criminal justice system is vital to
public safety. Defendants must believe that any attempt to
affect the rule of law by undermining the judicial process will
be punished severely.
Hearings
The Committee's Subcommittee on Crime held one day of
hearings on H.R. 3140 on March 7, 1996. Testimony was received
from two witnesses, Rep. Jon Fox of Pennsylvania, the sponsor
of H.R. 2137, and Kevin Di Gregory, Deputy Assistant Attorney
General, Department of Justice, with no additional material
submitted.
Committee Consideration
On March 21, 1996, the Subcommittee on Crime met in open
session and ordered reported the bill H.R. 3120, by a voice
vote, a quorum being present. On April 25, 1996, the Committee
met in open session and ordered reported the bill H.R. 3120,
with an amendment, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
Vote of the Committee
Mr. Watt offered an amendment to limit the application of
the bill only to defendants charged in the underlying case to
which the witness or jury tampering crime relates. The Watt
amendment was defeated by a 5-21 rollcall vote.
AYES NAYES
Mr. Conyers Mr. Hyde
Mr. Frank Mr. Moorhead
Mr. Scott Mr. McCollum
Mr. Watt Mr. Coble
Mr. Becerra Mr. Smith (TX)
Mr. Gallegly
Mr. Canady
Mr. Inglis
Mr. Goodlatte
Mr. Buyer
Mr. Hoke
Mr. Bono
Mr. Heineman
Mr. Bryant
Mr. Chabot
Mr. Flanagan
Mr. Barr
Mr. Schumer
Mr. Boucher
Mr. Reed
Mr. Nadler
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports
that the findings and recommendations of the Committee, based
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight Findings
No findings or recommendations of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House rule XI is inapplicable because
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
Committee Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with
respect to the bill, H.R. 3120, the following cost estimate.
The Committees estimates that the costs associated with the
increased sentences under H.R. 3120 will be negligible, and as
such, cannot be estimated further. The frequency of future
prosecutions enforcing the statutes amended by the bill cannot
be known. To the extent that there is a significant numbers of
such prosecutions, there will be increased prison operating
costs associated with the incarceration of defendants affected
by the bill.
Inflationary Impact Statement
Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that H.R.
3120 will have no significant inflationary impact on prices and
costs in the national economy.
Section-by-Section Analysis
H.R. 3120 consists of one section. There is no short title
for this bill. H.R. 3120 makes modifications to the three title
18 offenses relating to jury and witness tampering.
First, this bill amends 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1513, which sets
forth the punishment for the crime involving retaliation
against witnesses, victims, or informants. Current law provides
for a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment for persons
convicted of this crime. This bill amends that law to provide
that if the retaliation occurred because of attendance at a
criminal trial, the maximum punishment would be the higher of
that in the present statute, or the maximum term for any
offense charged in the criminal case to which the retaliation
related.
Second, this bill amends 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1512, which sets
forth the punishment for the crime involving tampering with a
witness, victim, or informant. Current law provides for a
maximum penalty of ten years if the act involves intimidation
or the threat of physical force, or one year if the act
constitutes ``harassment.'' If the act involved murder, the
maximum punishment is death. If the act involved is attempted
murder, the maximum punishment is 20 years imprisonment. This
bill amends that section to provide that if the offense
occurred in connection with a criminal trial, the maximum
punishment would be the higher of that provided by the present
statute or the maximum term for any offense charged in the
criminal case in question.
Finally, this bill amends 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1503 which sets
forth the punishment for the crime of jury tampering. Under
current law the maximum punishment is 10 years imprisonment.
However, if the act involved killing a person, the maximum
punishment is death. If the act involved is attempted killing,
the maximum punishment is 20 years imprisonment. This bill
provides that if the offense occurred in connection with a
criminal trial, and involved the use of physical force or
threat of physical force, the maximum punishment shall be the
higher of that provided by the present statute or the maximum
term for any offense charged in the criminal case in question.
Agency Views
The Committee received a letter from the U.S. Department of
Justice providing Administration views on H.R. 1143, H.R. 1144,
and H.R. 1145, and other bills. The letter addressed the issues
presented in H.R. 1143, H.R. 1144, and H.R. 1145, which were
later combined and re-introduced as one bill--H.R. 3120, in
pertinent part, as follows:
h.r. 1143--retaliation against witnesses
This bill would amend 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1513, relating to
retaliating against a witness, by providing that if the
retaliation occurred because of attendance at or testimony in a
criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment for the offense
shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the
maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense
charged in such case. The Department supports this penalty
enhancement, which is clearly and rationally designed to deter
the commission of this type of offense. As a technical matter,
it would appear that this amendment ought to be designated
subsection (d) rather than subsection (c).
h.r. 1144--witness tampering
This bill would amend 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1512, relating to
witness tampering, by providing that if the offense under this
section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case,
the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the
offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law
or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any
offense charged in such case. The Department supports this
penalty enhancement, which again seems rationally designed to
deter such tampering offenses.
h.r. 1145--jury tampering
This bill would amend 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1503, relating to jury
tampering, by providing that if the offense under this section
occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, the
maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the
offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law
or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any
offense charged in such case. The Department supports this
penalty enhancement, for the reason given in connection with
the discussion of H.R. 1144.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed
is shown in roman):
CHAPTER 73 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
CHAPTER 73--OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally
(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any
threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence,
intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in
or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be
serving at any examination or other proceeding before any
United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate,
in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or
petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict
or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or
having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate
judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property
on account of the performance of his official duties, or
corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter
or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or
endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due
administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in
subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in
connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in
violation of this section involves the threat of physical force
or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may
be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that
otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have
been imposed for any offense charged in such case.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) If the offense under this section occurs in connection
with a trial of a criminal case, the maximum term of
imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the
higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term
that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such
case.
Sec. 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) If the retaliation occurred because of attendance at or
testimony in a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment
which may be imposed for the offense under this section shall
be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum
term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in
such case.
[(c)] (d) There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over
an offense under this section.
* * * * * * *
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 3120, would amend sections 1513, 1512 and 1503 of
Title 18 of the U.S. Code such that persons found guilty of
witness or jury intimidation, tampering or retaliation could be
sentenced to the maximum term of imprisonment which could have
been imposed for any offense charged in the underlying case,
even if the violator of the section was not charged in the
underlying case.
Although we have no quarrel with the notion of imposing
severe penalties on those who intimidate, tamper with or
retaliate against witnesses or jurors, we believe the penalties
established in the current law adequately provide for these
situations. For example, current Title 18 USCA Sec. 1502(b)(3)
provides for up to 10 years imprisonment and fines for jury
tampering, while 18 USCA Sec. 1512(a)(2) provides for the death
penalty in cases where witnesses are murdered in order to
prevent their appearance at trial. Accordingly, the enhanced
penalties proposed by H.R. 3120 are unnecessary.
Moreover, we believe this legislation is overbroad and
would lead to unjust results and imposition of penalties
disproportionate to the crime. As currently drafted, H.R. 3120
would permit the imposition of severe prison sentences (even
the death penalty) for persons who intimated a witness but who
had no involvement in the underlying case or for persons who
intimated a witness for the benefit of a defendant charged with
one of the lesser offenses charged in the underlying case.
Finally, because the existing statutes are so broadly
drafted, relatively minor behavior can be deemed acts of
intimidation--from a glaring look to an angry telephone call.
Such a broad definition of ``intimidation'', coupled with the
extreme sentences proposed in H.R. 3120, would doubtlessly
invite overly zealous prosecutors to abuse their discretion.
For these reasons, we opposed H.R. 3120.
Melvin L. Watt.
Bobby Scott.
Jerrold Nadler.