ADVERTISEMENT
Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Tenth Circuit Blog
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Criminal Law
: Tenth Circuit BlogUpward Variance for Embezzling Tribal Official Affirmed
By Shari Allison
ADVERTISEMENTS
US v. Bullcoming, No. 09-6010, 9/3/09 - Defendant, a tribal official entrusted with handling his district?s share of gaming revenue, pled guilty to one count of embezzlement in exchange for dismissal of other counts and agreed to substantial restitution. He received a two-level decrease for acceptance of responsibility. At sentencing, another tribal official testified on behalf of the tribe that defendant had never accepted responsibility for his actions in stealing from the tribe in a separate case prosecuted in tribal court, and the government argued that it would probably never be able to prove the full amount of restitution. Defendant objected to none of this. The district court varied upward from the top of the guidelines range of 18 months and sentenced defendant to 36 months...continue to full postFull post as published by Tenth Circuit Blog on September 04, 2009 (boomark / email).
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

Valdes: No reasons for extraordinary variance
Comanchee Indian Nation Oklahoma Police Chief Ray Anderson Quits, Pleads Guilty To Embezzling $12K+
Embezzler pays back her victim -- by embezzling from new victim, authorities say
Eleventh Circuit upholds large upward variance to statutory maximum as reasonable
"Impermissible Factors" Follow-up
Shaw: Variance to Statutory Maximum Not Unreasonable







