From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 27, 2005 Decided May 31, 2005
Full case name: Arthur Andersen v. United States Docket #: 04-368 Citations: 544 U.S. 696; 125 S.Ct. 2129; 161 L. Ed. 2d 1008; 2005 U.S. LEXIS 4348; 73 U.S.L.W. 4393; Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P93,266; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 324 Prior history: Charges filed against Arthur Andersen LLP in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on May 6, 2002. Arthur Andersen appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Holding
The jury instructions failed to convey properly the elements of a "corrup[t] persuas[ion]" conviction under §1512(b).
Court membership
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Associate Justices: John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Majority by: Rehnquist Joined by: Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer
Laws applied
18 U.S.C. §1512(b) (2000)

Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696 (2005) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously overturned accounting firm Arthur Andersen's conviction of obstruction of justice on the basis that the law Andersen was charged under was not correctly portrayed to the jury.

During the fall of Enron, Arthur Andersen, which was Enron's accounting firm, instructed its employees to destroy documents relating to Enron after Andersen officials learned they would soon be investigated by the Securities and Exchange commission. On May 6, 2002 a charge of obstructing an official proceeding of the Securities and Exchange Commission was filed against Arthur Andersen LLP in Texas District Court. The jury found Arthur Andersen guilty. Andersen appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The fifth circuit affirmed the district court's decision. Andersen filed a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court, which was granted.

At issue was whether or not the jury has been properly communicated the law which Andersen was charged with violating. They were charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(2)(A) and (B), which made it a crime to “knowingly … corruptly persuad[e] another person … with intent to … cause” that person to “withhold” documents from, or “alter” documents for use in, an “official proceeding.” Arthur Andersen believed the instructions given to the jury were not proper. The jury was reportedly told "even if petitioner honestly and sincerely believed its conduct was lawful, the jury could convict." This is not true, held the Supreme Court. The statute they were being charged under used the language "knowingly ... corruptly persuade". Arthur Andersen managers did instruct their employees to delete Enron-related files, but those actions were within their document retention policy. If the document retention policy was constructed to keep certain information private, even from the government, Arthur Andersen was still not corruptly persuading their employees to keep said information private.

In a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court, Arthur Andersen's conviction was overturned. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the opinion for the court, and was joined by all associate justices.

• Summary of case from OYEZ