United States v. Frederick

656 F. Supp. 1461, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4068
District Court, N.D. Illinois·Decided March 17, 1987·No. No. 86 CR 829·Published

Opinion

ORDER

BRIAN BARNETT DUFF, District Judge.

The Seventh Circuit has held that in obstruction of justice cases, venue lies only in the district in which the acts of obstruction occurred. United States v. Nadolny, 601 F.2d 940, 942-43 (7th Cir.1979). The indictment in this case charges Mr. Frederick with threatening an individual who was testifying before a grand jury here in Chicago, but alleges that the threat was made in Miami, Florida. Therefore, venue is not properly laid in this district.

This court recognizes that a number of other circuits have reached the opposite conclusion. See, e.g., United States v. Reed, 773 F.2d 477, 484-85 (2nd Cir.1985), and cases cited therein. However, Nadolny is the law in this Circuit and there is no reason to distinguish between an indictment based on 18 U.S.C. § 1510, as in Nadolny, and one based on 18 U.S.C. § 1512, as in this case. See United States v. Moore, 582 F.Supp. 1575, 1577 (D.D.C.1984).

Accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of proper venue is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Frederick, 656 F. Supp. 1461, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4068 (N.D. Ill. 1987).

656 F. Supp. 1461 (United States v. Frederick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Ronald R. Nadolny
601 F.2d 940 (Seventh Circuit, 1979)
United States v. Thomas C. Reed
773 F.2d 477 (Second Circuit, 1985)
United States v. Moore
582 F. Supp. 1575 (District of Columbia, 1984)