Articles Tagged with sentencing

Published on:

money-1588321-300x258

Chicago – In United States v. Pu, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3224 (7th Circuit February 24, 2016), the court addressed the district court’s loss calculation and restitution order.  Pu who worked for two companies, one of which was the Citadel in Chicago, a hedge fund, was indicted for and pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a trade secret from Company A and unlawful transmission of a trade secret that belonged to the Citadel.  The district court found that Pu intended to cause a loss of approximately $12 million, and was ordered to pay restitution of $750,000.  He was sentenced to 36 months in prison. The $12 million intended loss calculation increased his sentencing guidelines calculation by a whopping twenty-level increase, even though there was no actual loss.  While the restitution order was based on a letter supplied to the court by the Citadel that included costs associated with an internal forensic analysis and an internal investigation.

The information that Pu was accused of stealing was used to conduct stock trades.  However, Pu use of the data resulted in him losing about $40,000.

For purposes of the sentencing guidelines, the loss is the monetary harm that was intended from the offense, or if the court cannot determine the amount of loss it may use the gain that resulted from the offense.  In the case of a trade secret, like in this case, the loss amount could be the cost of developing the information or the reduced value of the information as a result of the offense. However, the sentencing guidelines do not require any loss calculation greater than zero and the court called a loss amount “bonus punishment points.”

Continue reading

Published on:

Cgun-and-bullets-1146529-shicago – The Illinois Supreme Court finally issued its opinion addressing a number of aspects of the Illinois Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon Statute, 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6.  The Court found most importantly the mandatory prison sentencing provision unconstitutional under section (d)(2).

Accepting an argument that I advanced in my representation of clients charged with AUUW, the Court agreed that since subsection (a)(3)(A) was held unconstitutional, the sentencing provision  that requires mandatory prison based on section (A) was also unconstitutional.

Simply put, the Court found that the section of the AUUW statute which was previously found to be unconstitutional could not be used as a basis for mandatory imprisonment.

Published on:

 jail-979240-sChicago – Many client and their families want to know if they will have to serve 85% of their sentence to the Illinois Department of Corrections.  Here is the rule from 730 ILCS 5/3-6-3

 

A prisoner serving a sentence for:

attempt to commit terrorism

attempt to commit first degree murder

solicitation of murder

solicitation of murder for hire

intentional homicide of an unborn child

predatory criminal sexual assault of a child

aggravated criminal sexual assault

criminal sexual assault

aggravated kidnapping

aggravated battery with a firearm as described in Section 12-4.2 or subdivision (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), or (e)(4) of Section 12-3.05

heinous battery as described in Section 12-4.1 or subdivision (a)(2) of Section 12-3.05

armed habitual criminal

aggravated battery of a senior citizen as described in Section 12-4.6 or subdivision (a)(4) of Section 12-3.0

aggravated battery of a child as described in Section 12-4.3 or subdivision (b)(1) of Section 12-3.05

shall receive no more than 4.5 days of sentence credit for each month of his or her sentence of imprisonment;

A prisoner serving a sentence for:

Home invasion

armed robbery

aggravated vehicular hijacking

aggravated discharge of a firearm

armed violence with a category I weapon or category II weapon, when the court has made and entered a finding, pursuant to subsection (c-1) of Section 5-4-1 of this Code, that the conduct leading to conviction for the enumerated offense resulted in great bodily harm to a victim

shall receive no more than 4.5 days of sentence credit for each month of his or her sentence of imprisonment;

        A prisoner serving a sentence for:
aggravated discharge of a firearm, whether or not the conduct leading to conviction for the offense resulted in great bodily harm to the victim

shall receive no more than 4.5 days of sentence credit for each month of his or her sentence of imprisonment

Continue reading