Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

Ninth Circuit affirms one-day prison sentence for white collar criminal who stole more than $500,000

"Members of the public with respect for the law, even if they have less learning than appellate judges on our standards for abuse of discretion review and on the principle of deference to trial court sentencing, will doubtless consider it almost inconceivable that a man who steals more than a half-million dollars in a calculated and prolonged course of deception and embezzlement over several years will suffer only a single day in prison." So writes Circuit Judge Ronald M. Gould, dissenting today from the ruling of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

In his dissenting opinion, Judge Gould writes:

To provide for a mere slap on the wrist of those convicted of serious economic crimes, with no or virtually no time imprisoned as punishment, strikes a blow to the integrity of our criminal justice system. In the end, if not corrected, the majority's approach will be dangerous to respect for our legal system. Can it be seriously maintained that wilful offenders who commit white collar crime, who steal intentionally hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars, should receive no forced incarceration, while those poor and powerless criminal defendants who commit common larceny or theft often serve extensive hard time? I respectfully dissent because I do not believe it prudent for us as an appellate court to hold as reasonable sentences that in their laxity to white collar crime are patently unreasonable, and that indeed will likely be considered offensively unreasonable to the vast majority of law abiding citizens who may become aware of these proceedings.

The ruling from which Judge Gould dissented was written by Circuit Judge Raymond C. Fisher and joined in by Circuit Judge Sandra S. Ikuta.

Full post as published by How Appealing on August 01, 2008 (boomark / email).