United States v. Senak case brief

United States v. Senak

1. 1. Facts: S was a public defender who told his clients that unless they paid him an extra premium, he would give them inferior legal services, and they would go to jail. He was found guilty of 242 because they contended that he acted under the color of the law and deprived them of their right to property.
   2. Issue: Whether S acted under the color of law and deprived them of their property?
   3. The court holds that he indeed did act under the color of law, since he was appointed by the court, he had an official position as public defender, so he acted under the color of law. This allowed him to deprive his clients of property, namely their money… the concurrence agrees with the conviction, however feels that the indictment would have been better if it had focused on the sixth amendment’s right to adequate representation instead of the deprivation of property.