## Facts

- Thomas J. Maloney served as a Cook County, Illinois circuit court judge from 1977 to 1990.
- A jury found that Maloney accepted bribes and agreed to “fix” four cases, including three murder cases, and later obstructed justice during the investigation of the bribery.
- Bribes were arranged through intermediaries (“bagmen”), including a bailiff and later an attorney who had previously practiced law with Maloney.
- In one charged episode, intermediaries arranged a large cash bribe connected to a serious criminal prosecution; Maloney allegedly took actions during the case consistent with the bribe arrangement and ultimately acquitted defendants.
- At trial, the government used testimony from multiple witnesses, including attorneys and intermediaries involved in the bribe transactions.
- Two cooperating witnesses affiliated with the El Rukn gang testified; after trial, Maloney claimed the government failed to disclose certain benefits provided to these witnesses that could have been used for impeachment.

## Issues

1. Whether the government’s nondisclosure of benefits given to two cooperating witnesses constituted a Brady violation requiring a new trial because the evidence was material impeachment evidence.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the RICO conspiracy and substantive RICO convictions based on a pattern of bribery and case-fixing through an enterprise.
3. Whether the district court committed reversible error in rejecting Maloney’s related challenges to the RICO theory, jury instructions (including withdrawal-related arguments), and other aspects of the convictions.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the convictions and the denial of Maloney’s motion for a new trial.
- The court held that any undisclosed benefits to the two cooperating witnesses were not material under Brady because further impeachment would not have changed the verdict.
- The court rejected Maloney’s remaining appellate arguments, concluding that the record contained sufficient evidence to support the RICO, Hobbs Act extortion, and obstruction convictions.

## Legal Principles

- Brady requires disclosure of favorable evidence, including impeachment material, only when it is material—i.e., when there is a reasonable probability that disclosure would have produced a different result.
- Impeachment evidence is not material when it is largely cumulative of credibility attacks already presented to the jury and the remaining evidence of guilt is strong.
- On sufficiency review, an appellate court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and does not reweigh credibility determinations made by the jury.
- A RICO conspiracy may be proven by evidence of an agreement to participate in an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity; temporary retreats or tactical conduct do not necessarily establish withdrawal from the conspiracy.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Maloney’s public-corruption convictions, concluding that the undisclosed benefits to cooperating witnesses did not undermine confidence in the verdict under Brady and that the trial evidence adequately supported the RICO-based theory of long-running bribery, extortion under color of official right, and obstruction of justice.


United States v. Maloney, 71 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 1995)