Local Sheriff (and Deputies) Were “Agents” for Purposes of Federal Program Theft

US v. Underwood: Underwood was a sheriff in rural South Carolina who, along with a pair of deputies, perpetrated a scheme that saw them do private work while on the public payroll (to build Underwood a barn-sized man cave), skim additional compensation from a privately-funded drunk driving checkpoint program, and violate the civil rights of a resident who was arrested after filming the department’s response to an accident that took place in front of his home. For all this, the defendants were charged, and convicted at trial, of various offenses, and sentenced to terms of imprisonment of between 24 and 46 months.

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed all the defendants’ convictions and sentences. Among the issues raised by all defendants was whether the Government had presented evidence sufficient to prove they had committed federal-program theft (under 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(A)). They argued that there was insufficient evidence that they were “agents” of the particular county they worked for and whether that county had received more than $10,000 in federal benefits the preceding year. As to the first issue, the court concluded that the sheriff and his deputies were agents of the county, even though they were technically employees of the state of South Carolina, rather than the particular county that they served. That was because the definition of “agent” for the federal statute was broader than the concept of “employee” in state law and there was sufficient evidence that Underwood and the others were “authorized to act” on behalf of the county. As to the second issue, the court held federal grant money to the county (totaling $370,000) had enabled the county to purchase items, not simply be reimbursed for prior purchases. The court also rejected the defendants’ other challenges to their conviction and sentences.