No. _________ ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- SALVATORE F. DiMASI, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The First Circuit --------------------------------- --------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI --------------------------------- --------------------------------- THOMAS R. KILEY Counsel of Record WILLIAM J. CINTOLO COSGROVE EISENBERG & KILEY, PC One International Place, Suite 1820 Boston, MA 02110 617.439.7775 (tel.) [email protected] (email) Counsel for Petitioner ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Whether the principles underlying the McCormick “explicit agreement” requirement in the campaign contribution context apply as well in the context of a part-time citizen legislator’s receipt of professional fees or of other funds in anticipation of a future business arrangement. (2) Whether an elected state legislator can be convicted of violating federal bribery laws without considering the state laws claimed to permit the legislator’s conduct. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTIONS PRESENTED ................................ i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................. iv OPINION BELOW ............................................... 1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..................... 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PRO- VISIONS ........................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE .............................. 8 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION .... 12 ARGUMENTS ...................................................... 19 I. THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE McCORMICK “EXPLICIT AGREEMENT” REQUIREMENT IN THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION CONTEXT APPLY AS WELL IN THE CONTEXT OF A PART- TIME CITIZEN LEGISLATOR’S RECEIPT OF PROFESSIONAL FEES OR OTHER FUNDS IN ANTICIPATION OF A FU- TURE BUSINESS ARRANGEMENT ........ 19 II. STATE LAW DEALING WITH CONDUCT THAT CAN BE CONSTRUED AS BRIB- ERY MUST BE CONSIDERED IN THE PROSECUTION OF STATE LAWMAK- ERS FOR BRIBERY .................................. 26 CONCLUSION ..................................................... 32 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued Page APPENDIX United States v. McDonough, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit No. 09- 1504 (August 21, 2013) .................................... App. 1 United States v. McDonough, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit No. 09- 1504, Order Denying Petition For Rehearing (September 19, 2013) ..................................... App. 52 United States v. DiMasi, No. 09-CR-10166- MLW The Relevant Paragraphs of Jury In- structions ........................................................ App. 54 United States v. DiMasi, No. 09-CR-10166- MLW Excerpts of Trial Testimony ................. App. 67 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES Black v. United States, 561 U.S. 465 (2010) ................ 8 Cleveland v. United States, 531 U.S. 12 (2000) ......... 17 Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 225 (1992) ............. 17 Federal Crop Insurance Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 (1947) ........................................................ 32 Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452 (1991) ............. 16, 17 McCormick v. United States, 500 U.S. 257 (1991) ............................................................... passim McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987) ... 17, 18 Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) ................. 12 Opinion of the Justices, 375 Mass. 795 (1978) .......... 12 Rock Island, A. & L.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141 (1920) ................................................. 32 Scaccia v. State Ethics Commission, 431 Mass. 351 (2000) ................................................................ 28 Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010) ...... passim United States v. Abby, 560 F.3d 513 (6th Cir. 2009) ........................................................................ 15 United States v. Allen, 10 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 1993) ........................................................................ 15 United States v. Antico, 275 F.3d 245 (3d Cir. 2001) ........................................................................ 15 United States v. Bahel, 662 F.3d 610 (2d Cir. 2011) ........................................................................ 14 v TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued Page United States v. Ganim, 510 F.3d 134 (2d Cir. 2007) ........................................................................ 15 United States v. Kincaid-Chauncey, 556 F.3d 923 (9th Cir. 2009) .................................................. 15 United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) .............. 19 United States v. McDonough, 727 F.3d 143 (1st Cir. 2013) ................................................... 1, 9, 11, 18 United States v. Ring, 706 F.3d 460 (D.C. Cir. 2013) .................................................................. 14, 15 United States v. Siegelman, 561 F.3d 1215 (11th Cir. 2009) ........................................................ 15 United States v. Siegelman, 640 F.3d 1159 (11th Cir. 2011) ........................................................ 14 United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of Cal., 526 U.S. 398 (1999) ................................................. 28 United States v. Terry, 707 F.3d 607 (6th Cir. 2013) ................................................................ passim United States v. Terry, 707 F.3d 607 (6th Cir. 2013) ........................................................................ 15 United States v. Urcioli, 513 F.3d 290 (1st Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 131 S.Ct. 612 (2010) ................ 18 United States v. Urcioli, 613 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2010) ........................................................................ 18 United States v. Whitfield, 590 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2009) ........................................................... 14, 15 United States v. Woodward, 149 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 1998) ................................................................. 15 vi TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued Page Weyhrauch v. United States, 557 U.S. 934 (2009) ....................................................................... 13 Weyhrauch v. United States, 561 U.S. 476 (2010) ............................................................. 8, 12, 13 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS FEDERAL Article I, Section 9 of the United States Con- stitution ............................................................... 1, 23 Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Con- stitution ............................................................... 2, 23 First Amendment of the United States Con- stitution ........................................................... 2, 8, 11 Ninth Amendment of the United States Con- stitution ............................................................... 2, 11 Tenth Amendment of the United States Con- stitution ............................................................... 3, 11 18 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. ........................................ 25, 27 18 U.S.C. § 201(a)(3) ................................................... 29 18 U.S.C. § 201(c) ....................................................... 28 18 U.S.C. § 203(a)(1)(A) .............................................. 29 18 U.S.C. § 208 ........................................................... 30 18 U.S.C. § 666 ........................................................... 25 18 U.S.C. § 1341 ................................................... 13, 25 18 U.S.C. § 1343 ......................................................... 35 vii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued Page 18 U.S.C. § 1346 ............................................... 3, 13, 25 18 U.S.C. § 1951 ............................................... 3, 21, 25 18 U.S.C. § 3231 ........................................................... 1 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1) ....................................................... 1 28 U.S.C. § 1291 ........................................................... 1 MASSACHUSETTS Mass. Const. Pt. 1, Art. 6............................................ 23 Mass. Const. Pt. 1, Art. 9............................................ 22 M.G.L. c. 268A, § (1)h ................................................. 29 M.G.L. c. 268A, § 1(i) .................................................. 29 M.G.L. c. 268A, § 3 ..................................................... 28 M.G.L. c. 268A, § 4 ............................... 4, 11, 18, 29, 33 M.G.L. c. 268A, § 6 ..................................................... 30 M.G.L. c. 268B, § 5 ..................................................... 12 Mass. St. 1986, c. 12 ................................................... 27 OTHER AUTHORITIES Alschuler, Albert W., Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Neither Party, Weyhrauch v. United States ........................................................... 33 Brown, George D., Should Federalism Shield Corruption?, 82 Cornell L. Rev. 225 (1996) ............ 17 viii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued Page Brown, George D., New Federalism’s Unan- swered Question: Who Should Prosecute State and Local Officials for Political Contribu- tions?, 60 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 417 (2003) ............. 33 Buss, William G., The Massachusetts Conflict of Interest Statute: