White Collar Criminal Defense Group

Third Circuit Holds That An Extortion Conviction Does Not Depend On A Public Official Having Actual Power Over Government Action

John Bencivengo was the mayor of Hamilton Township, New Jersey.  One of his friends was an insurance broker, Marliese Ljuba, who earned substantial commissions in connection with insurance policies which were issued to the Hamilton Township School District.  When those policies came up for renewal, Stephanie Pratico who was one of the members of the school board, urged the board to place the contracts up for competitive bidding, rather than renewing the policies that had been obtained by Ljuba’s firm. Ljuba subsequently gave Bencivengo $5,000 to convince Pratico not to put the board’s insurance policies up for bid.  Bencivengo did not have any power over the school board.  He also could not vote on school board matters and did not have any official role in choosing who would be on the board.  Bencivengo was subsequently convicted of extortion in violation of the Hobbs Act. 

On appeal, Bencivengo argued that his Hobbs Act conviction was improper because he had no official authority over the actions of the school board and therefore, no actual power to replace Pratico or to otherwise ensure that the school would continue to obtain its insurance through Ljuba.  The Third Circuit in United States of America v. Bencivengo, No. 13-1836 (April 23, 2014) rejected this argument.  The Court initially noted that there was no doubt that Bencivengo had no actual power over the award of the insurance policies and that there was no evidence that Ljuba believed that he had such power.  However, a reasonable jury could find from the evidence presented at trial that Bencivengo’s position as mayor gave him influence over the school board and that Ljuba believed that he had such influence.  The Court concluded that a Hobbs Act conviction can be sustained where a public official: a) has, and agrees to wield, influence over a governmental decision in exchange for financial gain or, b) where the official’s position could permit such influence, c) and the victim of the extortion reasonably believes that the official has such influence regardless of whether the official had actual power over the decision.

Department Of Education Increases Transparency – Releases List Of Fifty-Five Educational Institutions Currently Under Investigation For Their Handling Of Sexual Assault Complaints Per Title IX

The White House Task Force Report on sexual assaults on college and university campuses called for greater transparency by the Department of Education concerning its enforcement efforts.  Accordingly, the Education Department released a list of the fifty-five schools currently being investigated over their handling of sexual abuse complaints.

The schools included on the list range from large public universities to private schools, including some of the nation’s most prestigious.  A school’s presence on the list does not mean that it violated the law, but rather an active investigation of complaints is ongoing.

Previously, the Department would confirm if Title IX investigations were underway when asked, but students and others were often unaware of these investigations.  The White House in January highlighted the need for intense scrutiny of sexual assaults on campus, and the Administration has begun fulfilling that commitment.  This week, the First Report of the White House Task Force to Protect Students From Sexual Assault “Not Alone,” was released,  we previously summarized that report here.