D.C. Circuit vacates obstruction count and finds Fifth Amendment violation
The D.C. Circuit vacated Schwartz's § 1512(c)(2) conviction, remanded for resentencing, and held that compelling him to unlock his phone violated the Fifth Amendment. It remanded for the district court to assess which remaining counts, if any, were affected.
Evidence on file
1 document on file
Ryan1 document
Ryan Nichols' own paperwork — grievances, motions, letters, cell notes.
ruling · Jan 17, 2025
United States v. Brown — D.C. Circuit opinion affecting Peter Schwartz
Published appellate opinion, 125 F.4th 1186, vacating Schwartz's § 1512(c)(2) conviction, remanding for resentencing, and holding that the compelled phone unlock violated the Fifth Amendment.
Discussion
Comments here become part of the public record. Moderated.
No approved comments yet. Create an account and add the first case note.
Add to the record
Create an account to comment on this case.
Bring the opinion, question, or missing context that other platforms bury. Comments are signed-only, moderated, and tied to one real profile.