United States v. William J. Cintolo Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: An attorney, acting as counsel for a grand jury witness, was convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice. The court held that facially legitimate legal actions can become criminal if performed with the corrupt intent to impede the due administration of justice.
Legal Significance: Establishes that an attorney’s professional status does not shield them from criminal liability for obstruction of justice. A corrupt motive can transform otherwise lawful acts, such as providing legal advice, into a criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1503.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
William Cintolo, a criminal defense attorney, was hired to represent Walter LaFreniere, a grand jury witness in an investigation of the Angiulo crime family. Evidence from electronic surveillance revealed that Cintolo’s true client was Gennaro Angiulo, the head of the organization. Cintolo conspired with Angiulo to ensure LaFreniere would not testify truthfully. After LaFreniere was granted immunity, Cintolo continued to advise him to invoke the Fifth Amendment, knowing the privilege was no longer valid. He acted as a conduit, relaying information about the grand jury investigation to Angiulo and conveying Angiulo’s threats and instructions to LaFreniere. The goal was to have LaFreniere “stand up” and accept an 18-month contempt sentence to protect Angiulo. Cintolo argued his actions were legitimate representation aimed at protecting LaFreniere. However, recorded conversations showed Cintolo knowingly participated in the scheme to intimidate his nominal client into silence for the benefit of Angiulo, even after learning of a murder plot against LaFreniere. He was convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a criminal defense attorney be convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice for performing facially legitimate legal acts when the jury finds those acts were undertaken with the corrupt intent to impede a grand jury investigation for the benefit of a third party?
Yes. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that an attorney’s conduct, even Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui offi
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Can a criminal defense attorney be convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice for performing facially legitimate legal acts when the jury finds those acts were undertaken with the corrupt intent to impede a grand jury investigation for the benefit of a third party?
Conclusion
This case serves as a critical precedent that an attorney's professional role Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis no
Legal Rule
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1503, any act, whether lawful or unlawful on Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in r
Legal Analysis
The court rejected the defendant's argument that an attorney's facially legitimate conduct Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- An attorney can be convicted for obstructing justice under 18 U.S.C.