## Facts

- Robert Garcia, a U.S. Congressman, maintained a close relationship with Wedtech Corporation, a defense contractor in his district, including assisting with government contracts and financing; Wedtech personnel made campaign contributions to him.
- The government alleged that Garcia and his wife, Jane Garcia, sought money and benefits from Wedtech in exchange for Garcia’s continued official assistance.
- The alleged conduct included arranging “consulting” or “retainer” payments benefiting Jane Garcia and a request for a $20,000 loan.
- The trial evidence described solicitations tied to prospective favorable action but did not include explicit threats of economic harm to Wedtech.
- Witness testimony indicated that, if Wedtech refused to pay, Garcia would at most stop helping Wedtech, not use his office to injure Wedtech’s economic interests.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to submit to the jury a Hobbs Act theory of extortion by wrongful use of “fear of economic loss” when the proof showed offers of favorable action for payment but no threatened economic harm.
2. Whether extortion convictions must be reversed when the jury returned a general verdict on counts submitted on two alternative theories and one theory was unsupported by sufficient evidence.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit reversed the substantive Hobbs Act extortion convictions and the related conspiracy convictions and remanded.
- The court held the evidence was insufficient to support submitting the “fear of economic loss” extortion theory to the jury.
- Because the jury received both the unsupported “fear” theory and the alternative “color of official right” theory under a general verdict, the convictions could not stand without knowing which theory the jury relied on.

## Legal Principles

- Hobbs Act extortion by “wrongful use of fear of economic loss” requires evidence that the victim feared affirmative economic harm; a fear that a public official will merely withhold assistance or stop providing benefits is insufficient.
- When a count is submitted to the jury on multiple alternative theories and the jury returns a general verdict, reversal is required if one theory lacks sufficient evidentiary support and the reviewing court cannot determine the verdict rested on a valid theory.
- Extortion “under color of official right” may be proved without threats, but a conviction cannot be preserved on that theory alone when the jury may have convicted on an invalid alternative theory under a general verdict.

## Conclusion

The court reversed the Garcias’ Hobbs Act extortion and conspiracy convictions because the “fear of economic loss” theory was unsupported by the evidence and the general verdict did not disclose whether the jury relied on that defective theory.


United States v. Garcia, 907 F.2d 380 (2d Cir. 1990)