Opinion ID: 858127
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Impact of Skilling

Text: On appeal, the parties have submitted changing arguments as to whether Robles and Garrido were charged with schemes involving bribery and kickbacks or involving undisclosed conflicts of interest. Before Skilling, Robles and Garrido argued that the government’s case was founded only on a bribery theory, and that the government’s evidence was insufficient to support their convictions. The government disagreed, insisting that its case was rooted in Robles’s failure to disclose a conflict of interest. In support of its contention, the government highlighted the district court’s finding that the indictment, viewed as a whole, alleged a scheme based on an undisclosed conflict of interest. 7 Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Skilling, the parties filed supplemental briefs addressing the impact of that case on the issues raised in this appeal. 16 UNITED STATES V . GARRIDO After Skilling, however, the parties traded positions. Robles and Garrido now argue that the indictment, and the convictions resulting from it, alleged only a failure to disclose a conflict of interest. On the other hand, the government now argues that the indictment is based on bribery and kickbacks. The government also argues that the district court’s instructions on the failure to disclose theory, while erroneous, did not affect Robles’s and Garrido’s substantial rights because the schemes alleged in the indictment “involved both bribes and kickbacks.”