Category: Federal Sentencing
In Appeal of Construction Fraud Case, DOJ Seeks Tougher Sentences
In a very rare case in which the government argued that it viewed criminal sentences as too lenient, the U.S. Department of Justice contended in an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit on Nov. 7, 2011, that the sentences handed out to two government contractors convicted of fraud did not… Read More
Ninth Circuit Upholds Dramatic Upward Departure in Fraud Case
Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a very large upward departure by a U.S. District Judge in Nevada of more than 17 years above the recommended range under the Sentencing Guidelines, based on conduct that the defendant was never convicted of or even charged with. In this highly unusual… Read More
Five Years Later, Skilling’s Sentence Is Still Up in the Air
On Sunday, October 16, 2011, an op-ed article by founding partner Jeff Ifrah and associate Jeff Hamlin appeared in the Houston Chronicle. The article discusses the upcoming resentencing of former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and the fact that it is now close to the fifth anniversary of his conviction. The following is the full text… Read More
District Judge Orders Much-Reduced Sentence in Fraud Case
A federal judge has made a major reversal in the case of Steve Warshak, the Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals founder who was sentenced to 25 years for defrauding customers who bought his “male enhancement” pills, which were advertised in the notorious “Smiling Bob” ad campaign. We have discussed Warshak’s case in a previous blog post. Warshak… Read More
Judge Imposes Draconian Sentences in Medicare Fraud Scheme
On Sept. 16, 2011, a federal judge in Miami sentenced Lawrence Duran to 50 years in prison, the longest sentence ever imposed in a Medicare fraud case, for his role in a massive fraud scheme that resulted in more than $205 million in losses. Duran was also ordered to pay $87 million in restitution. Duran… Read More
Appeals Court Limits Scope of ‘Intended Loss’ in Sentencing Guidelines
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit recently considered what type of proof is required for a sentence enhancement based on “intended loss” under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The court held that a loss enhancement applies only to losses the defendant purposely sought to inflict, not losses the defendant merely knew would occur… Read More
The Recession’s Effect on Federal Prison Sentences
On March 2, 2011, Jeff Ifrah, founder of Ifrah Law, and Jeffrey Hamlin, an associate in the firm, published the following article in the Los Angeles Daily Journal. Prison inmates in the United States may have reason to thank Wall Street for the 2008 recession. The bloated federal deficit is forcing agencies to tighten their budgets, including… Read More
Amicus Briefs Urge Reduction in Rubashkin Fraud Sentence
We first posted about Sholom Rubashkin—the former plant manager at the now-defunct Agriprocessors, Inc. — back in May 2010, when Rubashkin was awaiting sentence for more than 80 counts of fraud in connection with his operation of the kosher slaughterhouse. Since then, Chief U.S. District Judge Linda Reade of the Northern District of Iowa sentenced… Read More
In Federal Sentencing, Age Begins to Matter
On November 1, 2010, a new amendment to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines will go into effect that will allow a judge to consider a defendant’s age far more often than before in handing down a sentence in federal court. We think this change will have a major impact on sentencing in white-collar criminal cases. Defendants… Read More
Banned From the Internet: A Term of Probation That Is Overly Restrictive
The following opinion article by Ifrah PLLC founding partner A. Jeff Ifrah and associate Steven Eichorn appeared in the National Law Journal on October 11, 2010. Banned from the Internet Prohibiting a defendant on probation from conducting any business online is overly restrictive and not reasonably related to legitimate sentencing goals. By A. Jeff Ifrah and… Read More
IFRAH Law
