United States v. Salum
257 F.App’x 225
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Case Number 07-10944
Before Circuit Judge Wilson, Circuit Judge Pryor, and Circuit Judge Kravitch
Decided on December 04, 2007

Relevancy of the Case: Appeal against the conviction of a police officer for accessing personnel records and sharing them with a private investigator for financial gain and obstruction of justice

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• 18 U.S.C. § 1503
• The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The trial court had convicted the defendant for obstruction of justice and computer fraud for releasing personnel records of a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Agent.
• Earlier, the said DEA agent worked with the same police department as the defendant. He was investigating an accused, Carmichael, charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 3000 kilograms of marijuana. This accused maintained a website posting names and pictures of informants, witnesses, and agents who worked on his case. This website was very controversial, and it received significant media attention.
• Another DEA agent, Boreland, testified during the trial that multiple witnesses had expressed their concerns for their safety as a result of the website.
• Carmichael’s attorney hired a private investigator to gather information about the said DEA agent. The private investigator subsequently recruited the defendant, a lieutenant, to obtain the DEA agent’s files from the Police Department. There was no clear communication on the payment terms; however, the private investigator testified that he paid $1,000 to the defendant.

Prominent Arguments by the Counsels

• The defendant’s counsel argued that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a mistrial. The court’s Allen charge was coercive in the light of the extensive deliberations.

Opinion of the Bench

• Based on the available testimonies and evidence, the jury could infer that the defendant knew why the private investigator asked for information about the DEA agent. Thus, there is sufficient evidence to convict him for obstruction of justice.
• The defendant knew who the private investigator was working for. By providing information from the police database, he exceeded his authority for improper use.
• The Allen charge does not appear to be coercive. The trial court had urged the jurors to reconsider and gave them the choice of continuing deliberations or ceasing deliberations if the jury was hopelessly deadlocked.

Final Decision

• The court affirmed the District Court’s conviction.