## Facts

- Katherine B. Aguon served as Director of the Guam Department of Education (DOE) from February 1980 to December 1982.
- Pyong Hok Han, a businessman whose company sold supplies to the DOE, provided Aguon gifts and household appliances valued at several thousand dollars while his company maintained DOE contracts.
- The government alleged Aguon obtained this property “under color of official right” in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, and also charged conspiracy and other offenses (including false statements to a grand jury and conspiracy to obstruct justice).
- The trial court instructed the jury it could convict for Hobbs Act extortion if Aguon, as a public official, obtained property under color of official right, and that it need not find Aguon committed any specific act to induce the transfer.
- A juror had previously committed an offense described as similar to one being tried.

## Issues

1. Whether Hobbs Act extortion “under color of official right” requires proof that the public official induced the victim’s consent to transfer property, rather than merely receiving benefits because of office.
2. Whether the jury instructions adequately stated the required mens rea for Hobbs Act extortion and related conspiracy.
3. Whether a juror’s prior commission of a similar offense established bias requiring reversal.

## Decision

- The court reversed and remanded the Hobbs Act extortion and Hobbs Act conspiracy convictions.
- The court held inducement is a required element of Hobbs Act extortion “under color of official right,” overruling prior circuit precedent that did not require inducement.
- The court independently held the mens rea instructions on the Hobbs Act counts were inadequate, providing a separate basis for reversal of those convictions.
- The court found no proven juror bias warranting reversal and affirmed the non-Hobbs Act convictions.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Hobbs Act definition of extortion, “induced” applies to extortion under color of official right; the government must prove the public official induced the payment or transfer, not merely passively accepted benefits.
- Jury instructions for Hobbs Act extortion must require (1) an act satisfying inducement and (2) an adequate mens rea instruction reflecting corrupt intent connected to use of official power.
- Juror bias is not established by a juror’s prior similar misconduct alone; reversal requires a concrete showing that the juror’s impartiality was compromised.

## Conclusion

The en banc Ninth Circuit required proof that a public official induced the transfer of property to sustain Hobbs Act extortion under color of official right and required adequate mens rea instructions; it reversed and remanded the Hobbs Act extortion and conspiracy convictions while affirming the remaining convictions because juror bias was not shown.


United States v. Aguon, 851 F.2d 1158 (9th Cir. 1988) (en banc)