Document: 353 U.S. 391 77 S.Ct. 963 1 L.Ed.2d 931 Henry W. GRUNEWALD, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. Max HALPERIN, Petitioner, v. UNITED Daniel A. BOLICH, Nos. 183, 184, 186. Argued April 3 and 4, 1957. Decided May 27, [Syllabus from pages 391-392 intentionally omitted] Mr. Edward J. Bennett, New York City, for petitioner grunewald. G. Singer, Brooklyn, N.Y., Halperin. Rudolph Stand, Bolich. John F. Davis, Washington, D.C., the respondent in all three cases. Justice HARLAN delivered opinion Court. The petitioners were convicted on Count an indictment brought under 18 U.S.C. § 371, U.S.C.A. 3711 conspiracy to defraud United States with reference certain tax matters. Petitioner Halperin was also Counts 5, 6, 7 same indictment, charging him violating 1503, 15032 by endeavoring corruptly influence witnesses before a grand jury which investigating matters involved charged indictment. Each sentenced five years' imprisonment fined 1. On each 7, two fine $1,000, prison sentences these that run concurrently. Court Appeals Second Circuit affirmed, late Judge Frank dissenting. 233 F.2d 556. We granted certiorari, 352 866, 91, 74, order resolve important questions relating (a) statute limitations prosecutions, as decision below alleged be conflict this Court's decisions Krulewitch States, 336 440, 69 716, 93 L.Ed. 790, Lutwak 344 604, 73 481, 97 593; (b) use Halperin's cross-examination his prior claim Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination jury. For reasons discussed hereafter, we conclude convictions must reversed, new trial. 2 October 25, 1954, returned others conspiring among themselves 'to exercise its governmental functions administering internal revenue laws detecting prosecuting violations free bribery, unlawful impairment, obstruction, improper influence, dishonesty, fraud corruption * *.' further part agreement conceal acts conspirators.3 Overt within years date charged. manner already indicated. proofs at trial presented sordid picture ring engaged business 'fixing' cases bribes influence. In general outline, petitioners' scheme, is set forth more detail Appeals' opinion,4 follows: 4 1947 1948 firms, Patullo Modes Gotham Beef Co., investigation Bureau Internal Revenue suspected fraudulent evasion. Through intermediaries, both firms established contact Halperin, attorney, associates law practice. turn conducted negotiations behalf Grunewald, 'influential' friend reported large cash fee, would undertake prevent criminal prosecution taxpayers. Grunewald then used Bolich, official Bureau, obtain 'no prosecution' rulings5 These rulings handed down 1949. through subsequently paid $60,000 $100,000 Patullo.6 5 Subsequent activities conspirators directed concealing irregularities disposition Bolich attempted have report case 'doctored,' careful steps taken cover up traces fees Grunewald. 1951 congressional started King Committee House Representatives; felt threatened took hide their traces. Thus caused disappearance records linking taxpayers repeatedly warned keep quiet. 1952 called Brooklyn induce not reveal conspiracy, asked secretary talk attempts concealment were, however, vain. some revealed entire conviction followed.7 6 first question us whether barred applicable three-year limitations.8 1954. It therefore incumbent Government prove contemplated finally formulated, still existence 1951, least one overt act furtherance performed after date.9 where substantiation charge requires proof act, it shown subsisted return conspiratorial period. Hence, aspects, crucial determining has scope agreement, determines duration relied may properly regarded conspiracy.10 8 Petitioners, contending limitations, state object narrow one: When obtained, Beef, January 1949 Modes, say, attained conspirators' function ended. They argue, therefore, running no later than 1949, when returned.11 9 counters principal contentions: First, urges even if main institute prosecutions—decisions obtained 1949—the alleged,12 showed, included subsidiary element 'fix' cases, end escape detection punishment crime. Says Government, 'from very nature there had be, was, outset conscious, deliberate, every aspect argued since clearly continued long purpose accomplished, well period, timely. 10 Second, alternatively, contends central aim taxpayers, merely ruling, but absolute immunity prosecution; other words, objectives until 1952, ran undertook 'fix.' argument did 1949—1952 as, part, objective immunize prosecution, 11 hereafter given, hold Government's contention rejected, second, accepted, ordered. I. 12 think theory—that can, facts such these, deemed can extend purposes limitations—has been rejected 718, 593. 13 hearsay declarations could introduced conspirators. made named co-conspirator (transporting woman Florida immoral purposes) accomplished. ended, implied crime commission, binding co-conspirators. This argument. stated: 14 'Conspirators about commit crimes always expressly or implicitly agree collaborate detection, punishment. (Government's) succeeded failed, implicit phase survives, sole objective. 15 'We cannot accept contention. rule contended far-reaching results. plausible arguments generally most out-of-court statements offered evidence tended shield are persuaded adopt theory create automatically breach admission evidence.'13 Jackson, concurring, added: 16 'I suppose person planning collaborator whom he thought rely help caught, I doubt fact warrants inference purpose. 17 'It difficult see any logical limit 'implied conspiracy,' either means *. will impute confederates continuing defeat justice, conceivably bound another's unauthorized unknown commission perjury, bribery juror witness, (etc.). 'Moreover, assumption indefinitely offense result indeterminate extension limitations. If implies cooperate defeating imply continues possibility, possibility continue.'14 19 reaffirmed supra. Here again admissibility co-conspirators accomplished; life conceal. Although Lutwak, unlike Krulewitch, theory, holding proved implied. 20 distinguish ground those attempt mere kept secret occurred. contrast, says here actual conspirators, express initial itself. 21 unable that, record, distinguished basis. 22 teaching attained, circumstantial showing care As stated, allowing inferred great widening indefinitely. Acts covering up, though done context mutually understood need secrecy, constitute secret; hardly supposed men concert together advertise world. And again, inevitably followed actions Sanctioning practical wipe out time bind 23 A reading record reveals distinction between 'actual' 'implied' conspiracies conceal, urged upon verbal tour de force. True, language opinions stressing only on.15 Yet look present asks deduce nothing beyond adduced What evidence? beginning insisted secrecy. identities sedulously taxpayers; independent firm working Patullo's problems; told make sure books reflect payments Secondly, secrecy maintained. Thus, deliberate above-mentioned believe (quite legitimate) efforts produced successful ruling. Finally, danger exposure appeared. example, got rid Grunewald's hotel suite Washington; accountant lie concerning check associate conspirators; persuade jury; 24 find what is, (1) carried secrecy; (2) continuation accomplishment crime; (3) desperate begins come light; so does fall ban opinions. 25 effect, differentiation pressed words rather substance. should Today rearranges states it, amount thing: being elements virtually case, plus concealment.16 There shred direct show anything like original continue own self-protection, commission. 26 Prior view disfavor broaden pervasive wide-sweeping nets prosecutions.17 considerations policy behind warnings detailed. See J., concurring govern our today. tried, typical example situation faced bar statute, attempting open floodgates warned. accede proposition lengthened because secret, take bury traces, avoid 27 By mean never significance furthering conspiracy. But vital argues brief 'in kidnapping, hiding while waiting ransom planned aid kidnap. So here, concealment, identity action theretofore taken, unquestionably do analogy valid. Kidnapers hiding, ransom, itself, just repainting stolen car steal; necessitates concealment.18 More closely analogous kidnapers who ended—i.e., they abandoned kidnaped detection. latter indicate wish apprehended—a concomitant, certainly, Cain murder Abel Lord. 28 hold, considering obtaining rulings, agreement. II. 29 how submitted jury, second avoiding final tax-evasion conspired fix;19 attained; (4) period conspiracy; (5) thus timely.20 short, protect appendage theory. 30 accepted affirming convictions. 31 'What fixers sell freedom frauds. bargained protection evasion prosecution. 32 'This wholly ordinary illegal scheme announcement delivery substantial installment appellants agreed deliver huge sums paid. six-year Statute Limitations favor upon. interval assurance, others, whole nefarious might light, revocation criminally prosecute significant government, necessary prosecution.' 564—565. 33 legal unexceptionable. 'installment' aimed accomplish, clear begin indictment.21 34 Furthermore, warrant submission completely into 1952. many occurring easily motivated remaining 'installments' owing bargain—to wit, safeguarding vitality rulings.22 restricted provisional necessarily precarious taxpayers' troubles achieved 1949.23 fairly infer safeguard fruits partial victories won trying change. prepared engage frauds maintain effect tentative 1949.24 35 If, found aim, affirm. think, safely assume found, adequately 36 judge's problem 37 'You recall states, things, defendants 'continuing body, executive, ligislative, judicial perpetrated whatsoever including limited influencing, intimidating, impeding prospective refrain disclosing true facts.' alleges comprehended investigation, thereafter eventuate. count you consideration, inasmuch unless crime, any, outlawed. government advised recommended Special Agent's office, integral Congress Grand Jury Eastern District York, pursuance designed facts; occurred issue, determine whether, reasonable doubt, described place 1954 carry 38 'To Did Pattullo (sic) people received assurance Revenue, pursuant thereto? consummation, You understanding afterthought surface confronted investigations, find, matter law, guilty shows, too However, additionally known defendants. originally during extended include know expansion them knowledge One.' 39 constrained enlighten alive 1951. given failed achieve (that immunization prosecution), intended solely executed crime(that rulings). basic yet concluded accomplished subsequent exclusively fear far know, based impermissible opinion—namely, subordinate 40 finding single intention protecting interests, irrelevant happened rulings. meaningful not, impliedly, contemplate broadened retroactively incidentally effect. 41 left convict purely this, fatal error. equivocal. said, sustained. Under circumstances, essential judge unequivocally Further, partly calculated aim. 42 Since, charge, rested ground, stand, Count. III. 43 held disposes 1, touch 1503.25 Counts, stand defense trial, improperly allowed cross-examine assertion Amendment witness,26 justify Counts. untenable. 44 subpoenaed Revenue. Testimony linked taxfixing ring. series including, knew Steinberg (an employee co-defendant 1); Grunewald; escrow money ruling; phoned arrange meeting declined answer questions, answers tend incriminate entitled answer. He innocent, pleaded advice counsel furnish him, particularly represented 45 cross-examined put him.27 answered way consistent innocence. allowed, over objection, bring questions. Later, informed petitioner's plea reflecting credibility, guilt innocence drawn therefrom co-defendant.28 46 cross-examination, Raffel 271 494, 566, 70 1054, defendant's failure deny testimony incriminating impugn credibility denial admission. upholding likewise Raffel, earlier decisions.29 attacks grounds: distinguishable case; permitted court erred refusing requested, 'an innocent man honestly him'; (c) impliedly overruled Johnson 318 189, 63 549, 87 704; (d) compelling testify marked putative defendant, violated constitutional rights, Weeks 232 383, 341, 58 652, event him. circumstances controlling, permissible. 47 course, elementary impeach defendant witness. satisfied inconsistent. Wigmore, Evidence, 1040. threshold simply inconsistency permit impeachment purposes.30 read dispensing preliminary scrutiny judge, establishing inconsistent statement, irrespective made. issue decided came certified quite abstract form,31 really centered takes advantage asserted held, waives becomes subject impeaching witness: 'His waiver partial; having once cast aside cloak immunity, resume will, whenever inconvenient embarrassing.' Court, focus probative credibility. form voluntarily solve particular excluded value negligible outweighed possible impact jury.32 consider court, sound discretion, refused line necessity deciding stripped supra, otherwise re-examining Raffel. 48 tarry reiterate courts implication invocation Recent re-examination history meaning emphasized anew men. Griswold, Today, 9—30, 53—82. 'Too many, better advised, shelter wrongdoers. readily invoke perjury claiming privilege.' Ullmann 350 422, 426, 76 497, 500, 100 511. Slochower Board Higher Education, 551, 557—558, 637, page 641, 692, when, Term, said: 'The serves ensnared ambiguous circumstances.' 49 pass deem evident response Had nevertheless provided mouth. stated constituted link entirely friendship above reproach. statement answering acquiaintance elements. thing true, respect conclusions fortified number surrounding privilege: 50 counsel. 51 compelled, voluntary, witness; counsel; summon witnesses; opportunity testifying factors weighing exculpatory tribunal subjects witness questioning bears heavily inferences Amendment. 62. Innocent likely plead proceedings, without judicially supervised procedure provide safeguards whole, partial, truth. 52 important, grand-jury proceeding. For, questioned evidently considered potential defendant. whose 'fixed' testified gave largely later, essence testify. early natural providing himself. refuse building chain. indicted lack counsel's assistance bringing superficially 53 unmindful sufficiently go usually discretion judge. evidentiary grave overtones, feel justified exercising supervisory control question. dangers whatever derived used. instructions, namely, relevant weight less negligible, since, outlined above, involved; affected seriously exclude completely. oher hand, equating light contemporary history, negligible. Weighing factors, draw power administration federal justice matter. Cf. McNabb 332, 608, 819. 54 prejudicial error 7. 55 substance advising, lawyer, right privilege. sufficient 56 judgments remanded proceedings opinion. 57 Reversed remanded. 59 BLACK, wiht CHIEF JUSTICE, DOUGLAS, BRENNAN join, concurring. 60 concur reversal exception. 61 No. petitioner, appeared subpoena. relying provision 'No shall compelled himself.' 62 behalf. attorney questions; wrong-doing. objection previously At conclusion instructed himself testimony—in truthful trustworthy error, rest my special case. discredit asserts it. privileges destroyed persons penalized them. seems peculiarly incongrous indefensible exist Constitution honesty worthy enshrinement Constitution. To extent approval 196—199, 553—554, 704, explicitly overruled. section provides: 'If conspire agency thereof purpose, $10,000 imprisoned years, both.' provides, part: 'Whoever endeavors intimidate, impede commissioner committing magistrate, petit juror, officer discharge duty influences, obstructs, impedes, obstruct, impede, due $5,000 acquitted Paragraph alleged: body co-conspirators, whatsoever, to, employees, giving false testimony, (etc.) times misrepresent, cause misrepresented, concealed hidden, said conspiracy.' F.2d, 559—562. ruling investigative branch press charges taxpayer. cash. raise leave unrecorded sales, profits unreported income. Further associates. employees violation 4047(e)(4), 4047(e)(4). Count, sentence concurrently five-year related separate 2. governing 3282, provided: 'Except prosecuted, punished offense, capital, next committed.' September amended limitation 68 Stat. 1145, (Supp. III) 3282. Since amending terms offenses effective date, seem 25; barred. tried treat favorable harmless. corrected. See, general, 790; Bollenbach 326 607, 66 402, 90 350; McDonald Cir., 89 128; Manton, 107 834; Cousens, Agreement Element Conspiracy, Va.L.Rev. 898; Sayre, Criminal Harv.L.Rev. 393; Note, 276; Col.L.Rev. 1216. support point administrative practice recommendations reviewed higher echelon, whereas determination would, purposes, emphasize payment released down. Petitioners urge entered Siebricht, 976. deal n. 3, U.S., 443—444, 718. Id., 455—456, 724. 444, 455—458, 719—725; 616, 488. One cite influencing accompanied offer 'pay her expenses.' (in Jackson's words) 'law justice,' 'bound witness.' different saying bribe 'defeat justice.' missing Delli Paoli 232, 294, 278; supra; 350. Rettich 84 118; 128. governed (1940 ed.) 3748, began last return, pertaining year 1946, filed suggests lasted specifically Patullo, fixing taxfraud enabling stay get Evidence supporting 1950, another difficulties. nothing, disagreement fee incident actively soliciting future clients 1950 business.' Government. trouble engaging 'new' generally, investigations Congress, consisted old ventures seeking ones, indication intent operations Indeed, oral seemed abandon November months Agent wrote prosecuted Bolich's decision. sent thereupon Chief Conference Section write explanatory memorandum 'take little heat off situation.' 'doctor' himself, change specific exactly tenor discussions hire mysterious 'would ended,' 'prosecution case' avoided, settled civil tenor, 'nothing eliminated. concerned assessment, eliminating all.' quid pro quo. buttressed aware rulings; realized 'end' liability exposed constant 'tipping applecart.' 'keep mouths shut,' $25,000 'boys York' 'raise fuss phony through.' Another 'we ease thing. elated results, worried cooperation of. payoff boys. time. something else going up. weren't all. thing.' And, referring 'New boys' 1949: '(W)e settlement everything, money.' mentioned unanimous charges. Frank, dissenting inadequate putting basis—a share, infra—agreed proper 592—596. 2, were: Whether telephone call relative appointment member Glover ever met Oliphant, Treasury; (6) Steinberg; (7) Tobias, Beef; (8) Munsey Building Washington. 'During cross examination defendants, previous similar stand. No required give him; interrogate oath matter, assertions ascertaining choose invoked asserting Jury, reason chose assert unquestioned occasion. Amendment, co-defendant.' Gottfried, 165 360, 367. ruled plea, grounds all, drawing embarked method objections words: Court: position. Corbin (a attorney), me. 'Mr. Corbin: Tend incriminate. Or statement. understand proceeding say you, benefit worth want it.' contented asking subject. although inquiry was: 'Was require offering disclose trial?' 496, 567. assumed 568. 'the appropriately instruct itself truth deny.' indicated, 418, 981, him.'

Category: 0