A Cortez fisherman was staying put while others in his family were traveling to the nation’s capital to attend arguments in the case that bears his name.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear John L. Yates v. the United States of America at 10 a.m. Nov. 5, after press time for The Islander this week.
Yates spent 30 days in jail four years ago after a federal jury found him guilty on charges he still disputes —that he destroyed grouper in an effort to obstruct a National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration investigation.
In Yates’ appeal, he is challenging the obstruction charge under a criminal anti-shredding provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, legislation passed by Congress to address the massive cover-up in the Enron scandal.
The charge came as a result of three fish missing from 72 fish set aside in Yates’ commercial grouper-boat by NOAA-deputized Florida Fish and Wildlife agents who boarded it August 23, 2007, some 100 miles west of Cortez.
When the agents discovered only 69 short fish remaining in Yates’ possession several days later, they suspected he ordered his crew to throw the 72 fish overboard and replace them with 69 fish as one of his crew members testified — charges John Yates still vehemently denies.
“It doesn’t make sense to replace short fish with short fish. Now does it,” said his wife, Sandy Yates.
She also emphasized the overriding injustice in the over-criminalization of fishing regulations — not only in her husband’s case, but also in fishing communities across the country.
Over the years, Sandy Yates has spent hundreds of hours researching and following the appeal.
Days away from the high court date, Yates said he plans to be “tending to the store,” Off the Hook, a furniture and collectible shop the Yates opened in Cortez last year. Sandy Yates and their daughter were flying to D.C. for the proceedings.
Before the Supreme Court justices sit to hear the arguments, they will have read documents submitted by both sides, as well as nine amicus briefs — all in support of Yates’ position — including one from the author of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
The arguments will focus on whether Yates had fair notice that destruction of fish falls within the purview of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and if fish are tangible objects under the anti-shredding provision that makes it a crime for anyone to knowingly alter, destroy, mutilate, conceal, cover up, falsify or make a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede or obstruct a federal investigation.
Sandy Yates added one question she’d like answered, “How can a false entry be made in a fish?”
Yates’ attorney is Assistant Federal Defender John L. Badalamenti.
Counsel of record for the United States is the Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr.
The attorneys will make their presentations and be available for questions from the nine justices.
According to the court website, an audio recording of the arguments will be available Nov. 7.
A high court decision is expected by the end of June 2015.