Marinello v. United States

To convict under 26 U. S. C. §7212(a), the finder of fact must determine that the defendant had knowledge of a particular proceeding or could have reasonably foreseen that a particular proceeding would commence.

The Government charged Petitioner with violating 26 U. S. C. §7212(a) (the “Omnibus Clause”), for “corruptly. . . . endeavoring to obstruct or impede the due administration of the [Internal Revenue Code].” At trial, the jury was not instructed to find that Petitioner knew he was under a targeted investigation and intended to obstruct that investigation. Petitioner was convicted of violating the Omnibus Clause and the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction. On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Government must show that there is a “nexus” between the defendant’s conduct and a particular investigation or audit. Additionally, the Court found that the Government bears the burden of proving that the investigation was pending, or reasonably foreseeable, when defendant engaged in obstructive conduct. Targeted investigations, however, do not include routine administrative procedures that are applied to all taxpayers. The Court reasoned that they “have traditionally exercised restraint in assessing the reach of a federal criminal statute, both out of deference to the prerogatives of Congress and out of concern that ‘a fair warning should be given to the world in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed.’” REVERSED and REMANDED.