## Facts

- Robert Ware was indicted with others for conspiracy to distribute cocaine.
- Two coconspirators entered plea/cooperation agreements with the government and testified against Ware at trial.
- The agreements offered potential benefits such as pleading to fewer counts and sentencing consideration in exchange for cooperation and testimony.
- Ware was convicted in federal district court.
- On appeal, Ware argued that offering leniency for testimony violated the federal witness-bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(2), and required reversal.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(2) applies to federal prosecutors such that plea/cooperation agreements offering leniency or other benefits in exchange for testimony are unlawful.
2. If such agreements violate § 201(c)(2), whether testimony obtained through them must be excluded and the conviction reversed.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed Ware’s conviction.
- The court held that § 201(c)(2) does not prohibit the United States from offering leniency or related concessions to cooperating witnesses in exchange for truthful testimony.
- The court concluded that interpreting “whoever” in § 201(c)(2) to include the United States in this context would conflict with established plea bargaining and cooperation practices recognized in federal criminal procedure and sentencing.
- The court treated concerns about witness bias as matters for disclosure, cross-examination, and jury evaluation rather than a basis to criminalize cooperation agreements.

## Legal Principles

- General statutory terms such as “whoever” are not read to include the United States acting in its sovereign/prosecutorial capacity absent a clear congressional statement.
- 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(2) targets corrupt payments or gratuities to influence testimony; it does not bar government plea/cooperation agreements that exchange prosecutorial concessions for truthful cooperation.
- Plea bargaining and cooperation agreements that include sentencing recommendations or charge reductions are consistent with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the federal sentencing framework.
- Risks that cooperating witnesses may tailor testimony due to promised benefits are addressed through disclosure obligations, cross-examination, and appropriate jury instructions.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(2) does not criminalize prosecutors’ routine use of plea and cooperation agreements offering leniency for truthful testimony, and it therefore affirmed Ware’s drug-conspiracy conviction.


United States v. Ware, 161 F.3d 414 (6th Cir. 1998)