## Facts

- John M. Murphy served as an associate judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois (1972–1984).
- Federal investigators targeted court corruption through “Operation Greylord,” which used informants, undercover tactics, and some staged (contrived) cases.
- The government alleged Murphy accepted bribes to influence outcomes across numerous matters, including traffic and criminal cases, over an extended period.
- A federal grand jury charged Murphy with multiple counts including:
  - Mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341)
  - Hobbs Act extortion under color of official right (18 U.S.C. § 1951)
  - RICO violations based on a pattern of racketeering activity (18 U.S.C. § 1962)
- After a jury trial in the Northern District of Illinois, Murphy was convicted on 24 of 27 counts and sentenced to an aggregate term of 10 years’ imprisonment.
- Murphy appealed, challenging the government’s investigative methods, the scope and sufficiency of proof for RICO and other counts, trial-management rulings, and the trial judge’s refusal to recuse based on a close relationship with the prosecutor.

## Issues

1. Whether undercover methods and staged cases used in Operation Greylord were so improper as to violate due process and require reversal.
2. Whether the government could use evidence of related conduct (including traffic-court bribery activity not separately charged as bribery counts) to establish a RICO pattern of racketeering activity.
3. Whether the proof and legal theories supported convictions for mail fraud and Hobbs Act extortion arising from judicial bribe-taking.
4. Whether the trial judge was required to recuse under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) due to an unusually close relationship with the prosecutor, and if so, whether any violation required vacatur and a new trial.
5. Whether asserted evidentiary, instructional, or trial-management errors warranted reversal.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed Murphy’s convictions and sentence.
- The court rejected claims that the government’s use of staged cases and undercover tactics required dismissal or reversal.
- The court upheld the RICO conviction, permitting reliance on related conduct to prove a pattern when properly presented to the jury.
- The court upheld the mail fraud and Hobbs Act convictions based on bribe-taking tied to official judicial action.
- Although the court recognized serious appearance-of-impropriety concerns regarding the judge–prosecutor relationship, it declined to order a new trial on the record presented.

## Legal Principles

- Undercover investigations may employ controlled or staged scenarios to obtain proof of ongoing corruption; such tactics do not violate due process absent impermissible inducement or comparable fundamental unfairness.
- RICO permits proof of a “pattern of racketeering activity” through related acts forming part of the same enterprise; not every related act must be separately charged as a standalone substantive count if the theory is fairly presented and the acts are proved to the jury.
- Bribe-taking by a public official in connection with official acts can constitute extortion “under color of official right” under the Hobbs Act.
- A judge is not required to recuse merely because a lawyer appearing before the court is a friend; however, an unusually close relationship that would cause a reasonable observer to question impartiality can trigger disqualification under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a).
- Disqualification under § 455(a) is generally treated as operating from the time recusal is sought or ordered; prior rulings are not automatically void, and vacatur typically requires a showing of prejudice or a defect requiring reversal.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed a judge’s corruption convictions arising from an undercover investigation, holding that the government’s tactics and the breadth of proof used to establish RICO and related offenses were permissible, and that any recusal problem did not justify a new trial absent demonstrated prejudice.


United States v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518 (7th Cir. 1985)