Fowler v. United States

Background

Charles Fowler and several accomplices planned a bank robbery in Florida. A local police officer, Todd Horner, encountered the group and was shot and killed during the encounter. Federal prosecutors charged Fowler under the federal witness-tampering law that forbids killing to prevent information about a federal offense from reaching federal officers. Fowler was convicted; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court agreed to review because different circuits had reached different results.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether, when a killer intends only to stop communication with law enforcement generally, the Government must show more than that broad intent to obtain a federal conviction. The majority said yes. Relying on the ordinary meaning of the word prevent and on Congress’s federal focus, the Court held prosecutors must show a reasonable likelihood that at least one relevant communication would have been made to a federal officer. The Court said prosecutors need not prove that fact beyond a reasonable doubt or that it was more likely than not, but the likelihood must be more than remote or merely possible.

Real world impact

The decision narrows the reach of the federal statute by creating a 'reasonable likelihood' standard for cases lacking specific federal targets. That standard could reduce federal prosecutions in cases tied mainly to state investigations. The Court vacated the Eleventh Circuit’s judgment and remanded Fowler’s case so the lower courts can apply the new rule.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Scalia concurred only in the judgment and argued prosecutors must prove the federal link beyond a reasonable doubt. Justice Alito, joined by Justice Ginsburg, dissented, arguing no additional showing beyond the defendant’s intent and the federal character of the offense was required.