Brand Law Group Blog

Stan Quoted Extensively in TPM re: Supreme Court's Analysis of Honest Services Fraud

2009-12-10T11:23:00.000-05:00

If the law goes down, pretty much anyone else convicted of honest services fraud could benefit. "There will be a rush to the courthouse," Stan Brand, a veteran Washington ethics lawyer, told TPMmuckraker. Even those like Abramoff and Jefferson who were convicted on multiple counts, honest-services fraud among them, could get their sentences shortened. "Where you've got multiple counts, they're not gonna get a pass, but they could get a reduction," Brand said.

Brand, reached in Indianapolis where's he's attending baseball's winter meetings (the Granderson trade is the big news, he said), noted that former Maryland governor Marvin Mandel, and former Utah congressman George Hansen both had their corruption convictions overturned after the courts narrowed the laws -- mail fraud, and false statements, respectively -- on which they were convicted.

In a sign of how the issue is already shaking up corruption cases, prosecutors working on the case of former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich indicated earlier this week that they planned to re-file their indictment against him, this time with no reference to honest services fraud, because of the chance that the Supreme Court might strike down or narrow the law. Blago was charged in connection to an alleged scheme to sell Barack Obama's Senate seat, as well as other pay-for-play allegations.

Nonetheless, Brand, a longtime defense lawyer, said that if the law is indeed struck down, it won't be a major blow for anti-corruption efforts. He said that prosecutors still would have numerous other charges at their disposal, including bribery, gratuity, conflict of interest, and false statements, among others.

"These guys have so many arrows in their quiver," Brand said.

Stan In Politico re: Baucus' Girlfriend

2009-12-07T11:55:00.000-05:00

Stan Brand, an ethics law attorney who doesn’t think Baucus will get punished by the Ethics Committee, said, “You shouldn’t be disqualified because of who your boss was at any particular moment.”

And he said that the Senate confirmation process is meant to root out unqualified nominees who may be chosen because of cronyism, among other things.

“I think there’s an issue of who is the most qualified person for the job — but I think that gets addressed in the confirmation process,” Brand said.

Stan Named to Super Lawyers List for Third Consecutive Year!

2009-11-30T11:53:00.000-05:00

Stan In National Journal re: Ring Retrial?

2009-10-20T10:35:00.000-04:00

"These retrials tend to favor the government. It's like a do-over," said Stanley Brand, a Washington lawyer with experience in bribery cases. The prosecution can adjust its arguments based on lessons learned in the first trial, he said.
However, Brand noted, the evidence "doesn't get any better for the government." The Department of Justice "wins the vast majority of the cases that it brings," he said, so a mistrial can be seen as a "victory" for the defense. And that victory -- even if it wasn't total victory -- may embolden Ring's attorneys come June.

Stan in Roll Call re: Effects of Ring Hung Jury

2009-10-19T11:29:00.000-04:00

Last week’s mistrial in the case of former House-aide-turned-lobbyist Kevin Ring could open the door to more defendants to challenge Justice Department public corruption indictments, legal experts say.

“It’s like a traffic violation. If you pull over a bunch of drivers and everyone else sees that, they slow down,” said Stan Brand, a criminal defense attorney and former House counsel. “If it doesn’t look as if the department can convict these cases ... it certainly encourages others to contest. It certainly makes [DOJ’s] job harder.”

U.S. District Judge Ellen Huvelle declared a mistrial Thursday afternoon in Ring’s public corruption trial after the jurors declared themselves unable to reach a unanimous verdict.

Brand said the failure to convict Ring, who is accused of providing tickets to sporting events and other gifts to Congressional staff in exchange for assistance for clients of his then-boss, ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, could hamper other investigations by encouraging defendants to challenge indictments rather than accept plea agreements.

The recent unraveling of the case against former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) compounds the problem for prosecutors in public corruption cases, Brand said.

“There’s no question that the public integrity section is under duress because of the internal issues generated by the Stevens case and the Ring mistrial and everything else that’s happened,” Brand said. “How that will shake out is hard to say. It’s still the responsibility of that section of the department to investigate and bring these cases.”

(and more at the link)

Stan in TPM Muckraker/Politico re: Ensign Inquiry

2009-10-16T15:43:00.000-04:00

An expert consensus may be forming that the Justice Department will likely launch a criminal investigation into the philandering Nevada senator and his relationship with Doug and Cynthia Hampton.

"I don't see how they cannot look at this case," Stan Brand, a Washington lawyer and ethics specialist told Politico.

Stan in TPM Muckraker re: Ring Hung Jury

2009-10-16T15:42:00.000-04:00

Both Zeidenberg and Stan Brand, a Washington lawyer who has defended numerous public officials charged with corruption, also suggested that, in light of the Ring mistrial, some of the 17 lobbyists, Hill staffers, and government officials who accepted plea deals in connection with the Abramoff case may be kicking themselves. "It could certainly make some of these defendants think, maybe they should have pushed harder," Brand told TPMmuckraker.

Brand called the mistrial "a setback for Public Integrity, in a line of other setbacks" -- referring to the reversal of the conviction of former senator Ted Stevens, and the subsequent investigation into alleged prosecutorial misconduct during that case.

Stan in Las Vegas Review-Journal Editorial re: Ensign

2009-10-09T11:23:00.000-04:00

But at this point, Sen. Ensign does not appear to have broken laws or taken personal advantage of his Senate office. His vote on behalf of Nevada's interests still carries the same weight it did a year ago.

No senator has been expelled from the body as a result of an "ethics" probe since the Civil War. Yet we're to believe Sen. Ensign should resign, running out on constituents who elected him to do the job, because of personal conduct which -- while stupid and embarrassing -- is frankly of a "line forms on the left" variety?

"The ultimate accountability is through the political process," Stan Brand, a former House counsel and expert on congressional ethics, told ABC News. "If people think the system has failed, they have the ability to make a decision at the ballot box."

In 2012.

Stan in Legal Times Blog re Ensign

2009-10-05T17:21:00.002-04:00

Stan Brand of the Brand Law Group, a government ethics lawyer, said that, "on the face of it, someone is going to investigate this," both the Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee as possibilities. Brand stressed that he wasn't saying that Ensign is guilty of anything, but said the allegations in the story raise the possibility of charges.

What’s the next move? "You get a very good criminal lawyer," Brand said.

It isn't clear whether Ensign has already done so, but others agree with Brand. Thomas Green, a partner at Sidley Austin, said the information in the article likely warrants an investigation, and it could go in multiple directions. “It’s not an attractive situation,” he said

Stan on Roll Call re: DC Circuit 's Speech of Debate Opinion

2009-07-13T10:14:00.001-04:00

But criminal defense attorney Stan Brand, a former House counsel, noted that the Justice Department already confronts Speech or Debate whenever it targets a Member of Congress.

“It’s the same problem the department has in all these cases and has always had. They have to find ways to make criminal cases without drawing in legislative acts,” Brand said. “Despite all their remonstratives, they are able to bring cases and get convictions.”

Stan in Roll Call re: PMA

2009-06-02T10:17:00.001-04:00

“One thing I think is pretty clear is the internal deliberations about the earmarks inside the Congress, between the staff and the Member or the committee and the Member, I think are clearly protected,” said Stan Brand, a former House general counsel who is now a white-collar defense attorney.

and:

“I think the general lines would be that something done outside the legislative process, in the electoral arena, generally would not be covered: fundraisers, donations, solicitations to donors, all this stuff that would occur as a part of a campaign,” Brand explained.

“The problem here, in my mind, is what about that gets them any closer to proving anything vis-à-vis a Congressman than they already have available to them,” he added.

and

“The fact that it turns up in another place doesn’t deny it protection. You still have to go through the analysis and determine, ‘What is it?’” Brand said.

Stan on NPR re: PMA

2009-05-21T13:31:00.000-04:00

Audio interview for Peter Overby story.

Stan on Stevens Case Dismissal

2009-04-02T10:55:00.001-04:00

“It’s very significant,” said Stan Brand, a former counsel to the House of Representatives. “It’s obviously a very different and affirmative assertion of control over the Department of Justice and his signal that the department is going to demand higher standards.”

Stan Quoted in NY Times re: PMA

2009-03-30T10:15:00.000-04:00

“All the combustibles are here for a very salacious set of allegations that could go far beyond his campaign finance problems,” said Stanley Brand, a veteran Washington criminal defense lawyer known for representing Democrats.

Stan Quoted in American Lawyer re: Congressional Investigations

2009-03-04T17:01:00.003-05:00

Not everyone believes in playing nice with congressional investigators.
Stanley Brand, also of Washington, D.C., and a onetime counsel to the House of Representatives under Tip O’Neill, attracts clients who are fighting multiple agencies, usually on criminal matters. He’d rather fight Congress than “roll over and submit,” as he puts it, to a grand jury, the IRS or Justice. “There are limitations on their powers, despite what they think,” says Brand.

Stan in Post re: Burris and the Senate

2009-02-18T11:04:00.000-05:00

The evidence suggests Senator Burris lied under oath," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility. If the ethics committee finds that he lied as the Senate was deciding whether to seat him, he should be expelled "for improper conduct that reflects on the Senate," Sloan said.

Congressional ethics specialist Stanley Brand said Senate rules would permit an investigation that could lead to censure or expulsion if lawmakers decide that Burris procured the office under false pretenses.

"Having seated him under the apprehension that he was clean in respect to his relationship to the governor, I can see them taking another look," Brand said.

Stan's Speech at the 2008 Winter Meetings

2008-12-24T09:23:00.000-05:00

Stan on Morning Edition re Blagojevich

2008-12-12T11:03:00.000-05:00

Putting the defense perspective on the matter.

Stan on Diane Rehm re: Blagojevich

2008-12-11T10:42:00.000-05:00

Listen here.

Stan on Hardball re: Illinois Seate Seat Scandal

2008-12-10T11:19:00.003-05:00

Stan, live from Las Vegas: "I don't know how you prove the benefit to Blagojevich."

Here's the video.

Stan in Roll Call re: Obstacles to Expulsion of Sen. Stevens

2008-11-06T10:52:00.000-05:00

“The problem, I think, for the Senate — and in my view a serious constitutional issue — is given the voter condonation of his conduct, I think there are serious questions about whether they could expel him,” said Stan Brand, a former House general counsel and noted white-collar criminal attorney.

“It seems to me that’s a statement by the people of Alaska,” Brand added. “Under the case law there’s a heavy presumption — they’re entitled to have who they want.”

According to an October Congressional Research Service report, both the Senate and House have “expressed reticence to exercise the power of expulsion (but not censure) ... when the electorate knew of the misconduct and still sent the Member to the Senate.”

Counsel Jere Glover Wins SBA Size Appeal

2008-10-23T10:49:00.002-04:00

On Tuesday, Brand Law Group counsel Jere Glover--in cooperation with Robert Finkel and Diana Espanola of the Boston law firm of Morse, Barnes-Brown and Pendleton--prevailed in a size appeal before the SBA. The matter, appealed on behalf of The Woods Hole Group, Inc., marks an exceedingly rare victory in this type of matter. The SBA's Office of Hearings and Appeals accepted our submission of new evidence (rare in itself) and agreed with our contention that the Area Office erred in its size determination.

FEC Capitulates on Millionaires' Amendment for House and Senate

2008-08-03T19:30:00.001-04:00

WASHINGTON – On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Davis v. FEC, 554 U.S. ___, No. 07-320, and found Sections 319(a) and 319(b) of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 — the so-called “Millionaires’ Amendment” (the “Amendment”) — unconstitutional because they violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court’s analysis in Davis precludes enforcement of the House provision and effectively precludes enforcement of the Senate provision as well.

Full release

Stan Quoted in NY Times re: Stevens Indictment

2008-08-01T10:48:00.001-04:00

“It’s going to be a contest over whether he had the intent to conceal this,” said Stanley Brand, a prominent Washington defense lawyer. “Given that he paid for some of it, I don’t think that’s in dispute. He has a defense to put forth to a jury, and to some extent, that’s going to undercut the government’s contention that he intended to conceal all this.”

Unlike with a bribery charge, Mr. Brand said, the government is not expected to try to prove that Mr. Stevens had corrupt relationships with VECO executives and employees.

“No one is going to convict him for just failing to file his financial reports,” Mr. Brand said

SCOTUS Blog on Davis Opinion

2008-06-28T17:05:00.000-04:00

A bit of analysis from the source.