Opinion ID: 563868
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to Dismiss the Bribery Counts

Text: 18 At trial, the parties stipulated that BART is a local government agency that received in excess of $10,000 of federal funds in each of the years 1985 through 1988. The evidence established that the stair-cleaning project involved a sum in excess of $5,000. Simas argues that the district court should have dismissed the bribery counts because the prosecution failed to trace any of the federal funds to the stair-cleaning project. 19 The broad language of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 666 does not require a tracing of federal funds to the project affected by the bribe or a showing that the defendant had the authority to administer federal funds. 1 Only two requirements relevant to this appeal must be met to bring a defendant within section 666. First, the defendant must be an agent of a government agency that receives in excess of $10,000 from the federal government within a one-year period. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 666(b). Second, the defendant must accept a bribe relating to any ... transaction ... involving $5,000 or more. Sec. 666(a)(1)(B) (emphasis added). Contrary to Simas' contention, the language of the statute does not require the project affected by the bribe to be  'any federally funded transaction involving $5,000.'  See United States v. Westmoreland, 841 F.2d 572, 576 (5th Cir.) (emphasis added), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 820, 109 S.Ct. 62, 102 L.Ed.2d 39 (1988). 20 By enacting section 666, Congress plainly decided to protect federal funds by preserving the integrity of the entities that receive the federal funds rather than requiring the tracing of federal funds to a particular illegal transaction. See id. at 578. As the Fifth Circuit noted: 21 [A]ny reference to federal funds is conspicuously absent from the operative provisions, and it is clear that Congress has cast a broad net to encompass local officials who may administer federal funds, regardless of whether they actually do. 22 Id. at 577. 23 We conclude the government was not required to trace federal funds to the stair-cleaning project to establish Simas' violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 666.