Green v. United States

Background

This dispute arises from a criminal mail fraud prosecution under the federal mail-fraud law, 18 U.S.C. § 1341. The question is whether a defendant who presents evidence of acting in good faith is entitled to a separate jury instruction on that defense when the court already gives an instruction about specific intent. Justice White wrote a dissent arguing the case should be reviewed to resolve the disagreement among appeals courts.

Reasoning

The core question the dissent highlights is whether a general instruction about the defendant’s intent fully protects a good-faith defense or whether jurors must get a distinct instruction about good faith. The Ninth Circuit said a specific-intent instruction can be enough. Three other circuits agreed with the Ninth Circuit, while the Fifth and the Tenth reached the opposite view and require a separate good-faith instruction when evidence supports it. Because of that clear conflict among appeals courts, Justice White would have granted review.

Real world impact

The practical result affects criminal trials: whether defendants in different parts of the country get a separate, clear explanation about a good-faith defense can vary by circuit. Because the high court declined to review the case, the split among appeals courts remains in place, so trial practice and jury guidance will continue to differ across regions.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White filed the dissent and was joined by Justice Brennan, urging review to resolve the circuit split and to clarify jury-instruction rules in mail-fraud prosecutions.