Official Corruption Prosecutions for December 2007

Number Latest Month 50
Percent Change from previous month 22.0
Percent Change from 1 year ago -8.0
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) -14.8
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) -20.2

Table 1: Criminal Official Corruption Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during December 2007 the government reported 50 new official corruption prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is up 22% over the previous month.

The comparisons of the number of defendants charged with official corruption-related offenses are based on case-by-case information obtained by TRAC under the Freedom of Information Act from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys. (See Table 1)

When monthly 2007 prosecutions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of filings was down (-8 percent). Prosecutions over the past year are still much lower than they were five years ago. Overall, the data show that prosecutions of this type are down 14.8 percent from levels reported in 2002.

FYMONDT: Jan2001
_FREQ_: 51 FYMONDT: Feb2001
_FREQ_: 48 FYMONDT: Mar2001
_FREQ_: 63 FYMONDT: Apr2001
_FREQ_: 52 FYMONDT: May2001
_FREQ_: 60 FYMONDT: Jun2001
_FREQ_: 64 FYMONDT: Jul2001
_FREQ_: 27 FYMONDT: Aug2001
_FREQ_: 76 FYMONDT: Sep2001
_FREQ_: 63 FYMONDT: Oct2001
_FREQ_: 62 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 46 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 58 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 95 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 41 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 44 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 75 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 66 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 79 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 84 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 29 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 49 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 88 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 38 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 49 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 55 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 46 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 88 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 68 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 71 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 67 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 53 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 66 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 79 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 39 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 44 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 48 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 48 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 56 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 103 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 56 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 61 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 58 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 90 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 77 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 62 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 48 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 90 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 44 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 50 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 53 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 56 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 32 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 40 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 74 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 56 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 63 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 60 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 63 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 49 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 42 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 44 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 58 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 71 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 48 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 55 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 63 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 57 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 49 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 61 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 78 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 43 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 24 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 51 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 46 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 43 FYMONDT: Apr2007
_FREQ_: 62 FYMONDT: May2007
_FREQ_: 55 FYMONDT: Jun2007
_FREQ_: 61 FYMONDT: Jul2007
_FREQ_: 42 FYMONDT: Aug2007
_FREQ_: 57 FYMONDT: Sep2007
_FREQ_: 45 FYMONDT: Oct2007
_FREQ_: 52 FYMONDT: Nov2007
_FREQ_: 41 FYMONDT: Dec2007
_FREQ_: 50 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 56.333333333 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 52.333333333 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 57 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 57 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 58.666666667 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 56.333333333 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 55.333333333 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 66.666666667 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 60.833333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 57.666666667 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 59.833333333 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 63.166666667 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 66.666666667 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 64.833333333 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 62.833333333 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 63.666666667 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 65.833333333 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 61.166666667 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 56.166666667 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 51.333333333 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 54.166666667 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 60.666666667 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 57.333333333 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 62.833333333 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 65.833333333 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 65.5 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 68.833333333 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 67.333333333 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 62.5 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 58 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 54.833333333 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 54 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 52.333333333 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 56.333333333 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 59.166666667 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 62 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 63.666666667 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 70.666666667 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 74.166666667 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 67.333333333 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 66 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 70.833333333 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 68.5 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 61.833333333 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 57.833333333 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 56.833333333 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 54.166666667 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 45.833333333 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 50.833333333 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 51.833333333 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 53.5 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 54.166666667 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 59.333333333 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 60.833333333 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 55.5 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 53.5 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 52.666666667 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 54.5 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 52 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 53 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 56.5 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 58.666666667 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 57.166666667 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 55.5 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 60.5 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 58.5 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 52 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 51 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 50.5 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 47.5 FYMONDT: Apr2007
moveave: 44.833333333 FYMONDT: May2007
moveave: 46.833333333 FYMONDT: Jun2007
moveave: 53 FYMONDT: Jul2007
moveave: 51.5 FYMONDT: Aug2007
moveave: 53.333333333 FYMONDT: Sep2007
moveave: 53.666666667 FYMONDT: Oct2007
moveave: 52 FYMONDT: Nov2007
moveave: 49.666666667 FYMONDT: Dec2007
moveave: 47.833333333
Plot of moveave * FYMONDT

Figure 1: Criminal Official Corruption Prosecutions over the last five years

The decrease from the levels five years ago in official corruption prosecutions for these matters is shown more clearly in Figure 1. The vertical bars in Figure 1 represent the number of official corruption prosecutions of this type recorded on a month-to-month basis. The superimposed line on the bars plots the six-month moving average so that natural fluctuations are smoothed out. The one and five-year rates of change in Table 1 and in the sections that follow are all based upon this six-month moving average. To view trends year-by-year rather than month-by-month, see TRAC's annual report series for a broader picture.

Within the broad category of official corruption, cases were classified by prosecutors into more specific types.

Case types within official corruption are

  • Federal Corruption - Procurement

  • Federal Corruption - Program

  • Federal Corruption - Law Enforcement

  • Federal Corruption - Other

  • State Corruption

  • Local Corruption

  • Other Public Corruption

The largest number of prosecutions of these matters in December 2007 was for "Corruption(Govt Off)-Local", accounting for 28 percent of prosecutions. Prosecutions were also filed for "Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Procurement" (22%), " Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Program" (22%), "Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Law Enforcmnt." (12%), "Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Other" (10%), "Corruption(Govt Off)-State" (4%), "Corruption(Govt Off)-Other" (2%). See Figure 2.

The lead investigative agency for official corruption prosecutions in December 2007 was FBI accounting for 60 percent of prosecutions referred. Other agencies with substantial numbers of official corruption referrals were: HUD (12% ), Postal (6%), Agri (4%), Defense (4%). See Figure 3.

progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 50%  (50%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Local
percentage: 28%  (28%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Local
percentage: 28%  (28%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Local
percentage: 28%  (28%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Local
percentage: 28%  (28%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Local
percentage: 28%  (28%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Procu
percentage: 22%  (22%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Procu
percentage: 22%  (22%) progcatlabel: Corruption(Govt Off)-Fed Procu
percentage: 22%  (22%)
PIE3D chart of progcatlabel

Figure 2: Specific types of prosecutions
agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 6%  (6%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 14%  (14%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: HUD
percentage: 12%  (12%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 60%  (60%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 4%  (4%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 4%  (4%) agenrevgrp: Defense
percentage: 4%  (4%) agenrevgrp: Agri
percentage: 4%  (4%) agenrevgrp: Agri
percentage: 4%  (4%) agenrevgrp: Agri
percentage: 4%  (4%)
PIE3D chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 3: Prosecutions by Investigative Agency

Official Corruption Prosecutions in U.S. Magistrate Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

In December 2007, 16 percent of official corruption cases for these matters took place in U.S. Magistrate Courts which handle less serious misdemeanor cases, including what are called "petty offenses." In the magistrate courts in December the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 18 U.S.C Section 201 involving the "Bribery of public officials and witnesses". This was the lead charge for 25 percent of all magistrate filings in December.

Official Corruption Prosecutions in U.S. District Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

Table 2 shows the top lead charges recorded in the prosecutions of official corruption matters filed in U.S. District Court during December 2007.

Lead Charge Count Rank  
18 USC 666 - Theft or bribery in programs receiving Fed funds 10 1 More
18 USC 1951 - Hobbs Act 6 2 More
18 USC 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses 5 3 More
21 USC 841 - Drug Abuse Prevention + Control-Prohibited acts A 5 3 More
18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles 4 5 More
18 USC 641 - Public money, property or records 3 6 More
18 USC 287 - False, fictitious or fraudulent claims 2 7 More
18 USC 510 - Forging endorsements on Treasury checks, bonds se 1 8 More
18 USC 922 - Firearms; Unlawful acts 1 8 More
18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents 1 8 More
18 USC 1030 - Fraud and related activity - computers 1 8 More
18 USC 1621 - Perjury generally 1 8 More
18 USC 1703 - Delay or destruction of mail or newspapers 1 8 More
18 USC 1791 - Providing or possessing contraband in prison 1 8 More

Table 2: Top charges filed

  • "Theft or bribery in programs receiving Fed funds" (Title 18 U.S.C Section 666) was the most frequent recorded lead charge.

  • Ranked 2nd in frequency was the lead charge "Hobbs Act" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1951.

  • Ranked 3rd were "Bribery of public officials and witnesses" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 201 and "Drug Abuse Prevention + Control-Prohibited acts A" under Title 21 U.S.C Section 841.

Top Ranked Judicial Districts

In December 2007 the Justice Department said the government brought 16.8 official corruption prosecutions for every ten million people in the United States.

Understandably, there is great variation in the number of official corruption prosecutions that are filed in each of the nation's ninety-four federal judicial districts.

The districts registering the largest number of prosecutions of this type last month are shown in Table 3.


Judicial District Count Rank  
Fla, M 7 1 More
N. J. 5 2 More
Ohio, S 5 2 More
Mo, E 4 4 More
N. Y., S 3 5 More
Ark, E 2 6 More
Penn, W 2 6 More
Puer Rico 2 6 More
Wash, W 2 6 More
Ga, M 1 10 More
Guam 1 10 More
Ken, E 1 10 More
La, W 1 10 More
N. Y., E 1 10 More
Penn, E 1 10 More
Tenn, W 1 10 More
Texas, N 1 10 More
Wisc, E 1 10 More
Wyoming 1 10 More

Table 3: Top 10 districts

  • The Middle District of Florida (Tampa)—with 7 prosecutions—was the most active during December 2007.

  • The District of New Jersey and Southern District of Ohio (Cincinnati) ranked 2nd.

Top Ranked District Judges

At any one time, there are about 680 federal District Court judges working in the United States. The judges recorded with the largest number of new official corruption crime cases of this type during December 2007 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank  
Bucklew, Susan C. Fla, M 5 1 More
Marbley, Algenon L. Ohio, S 5 1 More
Simandle, Jerome B. N. J. 3 3 More
Moody, James M. Ark, E 2 4 More
Hodges, William Terrell Fla, M 2 4 More
Limbaugh, Stephen Nathaniel Mo, E 2 4 More
Fuste, Jose Antonio Puer Rico 2 4 More
Lawson, Hugh Ga, M 1 8 More
Bunning, David L. Ken, E 1 8 More
Shaw, Charles Alexander Mo, E 1 8 More
Sippel, Rodney W. Mo, E 1 8 More
Thompson, Anne Elise N. J. 1 8 More
Walls, William H. N. J. 1 8 More
Keenan, John Fontaine N. Y., S 1 8 More
Robreno, Eduardo C. Penn, E 1 8 More
Cohill, Maurice Blanchard Jr. Penn, W 1 8 More
Conti, Joy Flowers Penn, W 1 8 More
McCalla, Jon Phipps Tenn, W 1 8 More
Fitzwater, Sidney Allen Texas, N 1 8 More
Burgess, Franklin D. Wash, W 1 8 More
Stadtmueller, Joseph Peter Wisc, E 1 8 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

All 21 of the "top ten" judges were in districts which were in the top ten with the largest number of official corruption filings . (Because of ties, there were a total of 21 judges in the "top ten" rankings.)

  • Judges Susan C. Bucklew in the Middle District of Florida (Tampa) and Algenon L. Marbley in the Southern District of Ohio (Cincinnati) ranked 1st with 5 defendants in official corruption cases.

  • Judge Jerome B. Simandle in the District of New Jersey ranked 3rd with 3 defendants in official corruption cases.

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2008, TRAC Reports, Inc.

TRAC RSS Feed for this page Email Feed for this page Email this page