## Facts

- A private school in San Francisco hired Isabel Dykes, a British citizen, as a mathematics teacher and provided paperwork for a J-1 visa.
- After the employment relationship deteriorated, the school terminated Dykes and sent a letter stating her J-1 visa was “null and void” and advising her to return to England.
- Dykes and her boyfriend drafted a letter to the school accusing it of “illegal” conduct, including “continuously abus[ing] U.S. laws” to “illegally get rid of” foreign teachers.
- The letter stated Dykes would send the accusations to governmental authorities and the media unless the school complied with her demands.
- Dykes demanded an apology and immediate payment of $40,000 in salary plus $20,000 in damages (totaling $60,000), stating this was the “only way” for the school to “get off the hook.”
- The government charged Dykes with blackmail under 18 U.S.C. § 873.
- A jury in the Northern District of California convicted Dykes, and she appealed on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to prove a qualifying “threat” under § 873.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find that Dykes made a threat to inform authorities or the public of a violation of federal law within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 873.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to show Dykes demanded money or another “thing of value” under a threat of informing, as required by § 873.
3. Whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of § 873 beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The court held that a rational jury could find the letter threatened to inform the public and authorities of alleged violations of federal immigration laws if the school did not pay $60,000.
- The court held the letter’s demand for $60,000 constituted a demand for money (a “thing of value”) under § 873.
- The court held the threat and the demand were sufficiently linked because the letter conditioned avoiding exposure on the school’s apology and payment.

## Legal Principles

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 873, it is a federal offense to demand or receive money or another valuable thing under a threat of informing (or in exchange for not informing) against a violation of a law of the United States.
- On sufficiency-of-the-evidence review, the court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and affirms if any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- A communication may satisfy § 873 where it (1) threatens to report alleged federal-law violations to authorities or the public and (2) couples that threat with a conditional demand for payment to avoid the report.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit affirmed Dykes’s blackmail conviction because the letter’s accusations of illegality, stated intent to contact authorities and the media, and explicit conditional demand for $60,000 provided sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find a threat to inform of a federal-law violation made to obtain money under 18 U.S.C. § 873.


United States v. Dykes, 24 F. App’x 718 (9th Cir. 2001)