Judge Mills’s view of this case was driven by two things: First, the seriousness of the case and the assault on the rule of law it represented, and, second, on the fact that Joey’s cooperation was what he’d already agreed to do, and for which he already had received a great benefit, because the case guidelines at 60 months and he had a plea agreement that capped his sentence at 36 months.
The judge started by saying that under the guidelines, there is a total offense level of 27. This guidelines up to 60 months.
I have considered the statements … and letters… and have given a great deal of thought to this case. For the lawyers in the Northern District of Mississippi and the attorneys it is a very personal matter.
The young lawyers who wrote letters on your behalf are outstanding young lawyers and are people of credibility. … You have as much talent as any attorney as I’ve ever seen. You are an outstanding litigator. With those talents came a duty to truthfully, honestly, and fairly represent your clients, and that talent has been taken away.
He discussed the “purposes of sentencing. One is deterrence. Of small town lawyers I know, most don’t need deterring. For most it would be absolutely unthinkable. It may deter those that need boundaries.”
The issue here is the rule of law. That’s what is so important. Men and women are dying today to serve what is the rule of law. The rule of law gives us the lifestyles we have, gives us opportunity. The people who go to work every day believe that people who have positions of trust will not violate their positions of trust. The damage you have done to the rule of law is the real tragedy in this case. The plea agreement in this case is based on your assurance you would cooperate. The 5K.1 shows that you have carried out that agreement. The agreement provides that 36 months will is the appropriate sentence and this will be your sentence.
He upwardly departed on the fine because of the seriousness on a fine and ordered a fine of $250K. He ordered a report date of January 15th.
There was considerable surprise (possibly even shock) for some in the courtroom.
Please describe the looks on various faces, NMC — Joey’s, Tony’s, Judge Mills’, anybody else’s. Did Joey nearly faint?
This was about substance. There was shock in the courtroom. I did not see anyone nearly faint. I think Tom Dawson was genuinely surprised and there was sobbing in the gallery.
I’ll post atmospherics later.
MMC: Thanks for the report. Your predictions re the applicable sentencing guidelines were much more accurate than mine. I am surprised that the judge did not go below the 36 months cap stated in the plea agreement. I thought the government’s 5k1.1 motion was an invitation (if not advocacy) for a downward adjustment. Do you still see a possibility of a Rule 35 downward adjustment when the dust settles on “Scruggs II”? Do you see any indication that the 36 month hit was to keep Langston on the reservation until the other stuff is resolved? Surely there is more to come.
Yes, it’s possible but it’s going to be hard to win, and no, I think the judge was doing exactly what he explicitly said he was doing. I think this was all literally about the words the judge said in sentencing, keeping in mind the benefit the judge gave when he approved the plea agreement. I will do a post about thoughts & atmospherics later today.
Think the curtain will go up on Scruggs II as early as Jan?
Habeas, I was still wrong to a degree (in the analysis I explained in email to you)– I thought it guidelined at least to 32, and so I was at least 5 points high.
Part of my analysis was total guesswork– I did not know how the PSR would calculate the money involved. I was guessing it had to be at least $3M. If the rest of my numbers were right, they must have plugged a different dollar number in there.
wait– I’m suddenly having a deep thought.
NMC: I was under the assumption that following sentencing defendants reported directly to jail or prison without delay. There have been several delayed report dates in the cases featured on folo. Is this normal?
they’re normal in non flight-risk or danger-to-society cases (cases that aren’t drugs or guns or violence).
I’m puzzled whether the shock was because 36 months seemed too long or too short.
NMC: Can you give us your post on atmosphere of the Courtroom? I would guess that it was not similar to the shock of Zach’s sentencing.
NMC’s doing his day job for a couple of hours and will be back to blogging ASAP. Meanwhile, we can speckle-8 to our hearts’ content.
Anderson 9, my impression is that the shocked silently gasped “that LONG?!”
You have no heart if you would ever consider joking about the reactions of loved ones in that court room. You merely state there was “sobbing” but if this was your loved one wouldn’t you? So close to Christmas also. That just shows heartlessness even though I know it is your job to sit on your computer and post blogs just to get reactions. Does it make you content to see that someone is laughing at the reactions of upset loved ones? They didn’t do anything to deserve any of your snide comments. Why do you need to know anything about the reactions? You see the sentence and think what you think. That should be enough.
Justathought, where do you see any joking or laughing? I sure can’t find any on this thread.
Justathought wrote: “You have no heart if you would ever consider joking about the reactions of loved ones in that court room. You merely state there was “sobbing” but if this was your loved one wouldn’t you? So close to Christmas also. That just shows heartlessness…”
Justathought, my posts took what happened as seriously as is possible. I do not think there is anything in my descriptions of what occurred (including sobbing– and I will note that I did not identify anyone connected to that observation at all) that suggests other than deadly seriousness. If you can show me otherwise, I’ll consider editing a change.
I have inquired as to the atmosphere. It is not intended to get reactions from loved ones. They are entitled to be upset. My question is for the reaction of the lawyers invovled and lawyers observing the proceedings. Probably should have been more clear.
Nothing at all unclear or untoward in your question, amicus. Nope. Goes without saying that Langston family members were upset, but they weren’t the ones we were asking about, I feel sure; rather, I wanted to know about the main actors in the drama — all of them current or former Bar members.
Justathought, your righteous indignation would ring true if anyone here were gloating or laughing. There’s been none of that. But courtroom proceedings often elicit outcries, sobbing, haughty disadain, weeping, wailing. It’s all part of the process and isn’t something the press should ignore. You wouldn’t go down to the ER, with a folding chair, for the afternoon, and expect
everyone there to stifle all emotion. It’s just part of the game.
I said it several weeks ago Judge Mills would give him every bit of 36 months. I don’t blame him at all, as he said these are serious crimes and should be addressed as such. All of them did as much damage to our system of justice as any criminal did to its victim, a bank robber, rapist, etc. etc.
Balducci and Patterson should take notice, they will not avoid jail time either, especially Balducci, who apparently had this as part of his legal mindset (i. e. the bribe about the DUI case).