...the prosecution's main evidence of guilt comes from a co-operating co-participant in the illegal venture who is singing for his supper.

Singleton was originally convicted of money laundering and conspiring to distribute cocaine. At first, a panel of the U.S.C.A. (10th Circuit) reversed her convictions, holding that the prosecuting attorney violated the so-called "anti-gratutuity statute", 18 U.S.C.§201(c)(2), when he offered leniency to a co-defendant in exchange for truthful testimony. Following that judgment, there was a general call to arms by prosecutors across the United States, who perceived — correctly — that their ability to make patches with accomplices and co-defendants was in jeopardy as a result of the judgment. The government then brought an application for reconsideration of the original appellate judgment, which was granted, and the matter went before the full twelve members of the Court of Appeals (10th Circuit). The full court ultimately reversed the first appeal court judgment and affirmed Singleton’s convictions, holding that the anti-gratuity statute did not apply to the government but only applied to private persons seeking to bribe witnesses.