Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-3766 U.S. v. Hill

By: Rick Benedict//July 5, 2011//

10-3766 U.S. v. Hill

By: Rick Benedict//July 5, 2011//

Listen to this article

Sentencing
Extortion; enhancement for conduct as a public official

The district court correctly rendered an above-guideline sentence to a deputy liquor commissioner/assistant mayor convicted of attempting to commit extortion, pursuant to the upward adjustment allowed public officials in high-level decisionmaking or sensitive roles, because he demonstrated actual, and not apparent, authority.

“The district court found that Hill actually had substantial influence over the licensing process. This finding wasn’t clearly erroneous; there was more than sufficient testimony on which the district court could have based its determination. The record shows that Hill and the mayor were friends (going back to their college fraternity days) and Hill assisted the mayor, at times standing in his place at events. Once in office, the mayor extended his friend a benefit by creating a position of deputy liquor commissioner and appointing Hill to that position, even though Hill had no background to support his placement in that position. As deputy liquor commissioner and the mayor’s assistant, Hill had de facto authority and power to deny renewal of licenses, inspect and review license holders’ businesses and records, and issue citations for liquor code violations. The district court credited Hill’s statement to agent Murphy that he handled the liquor licensing for the city because ‘the [m]ayor does not really know what he is doing in reference to liquor licenses.’ Even if the mayor had the ultimate authority over the licensing process and signed the liquor licenses, the evidence revealed that he didn’t provide meaningful supervision over Hill in the execution of his duties. As a result, Hill was able to blatantly flaunt and misuse his power for personal benefit. The court’s conclusion that Hill ‘exercised an inordinate amount of discretion over the licensing of liquor establishments and the renewal of those licenses’ wasn’t erroneous.”

Affirmed.

10-3766, U.S. v. Hill, Southern District of Illinois, Reagan, J., Tinder, J.

TAGS: 7th Circuit Digest, Criminal Digest, Sentencing Digest

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests