Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing — government employees as victims — diminished mental capacity

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 16, 2013//

Sentencing — government employees as victims — diminished mental capacity

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 16, 2013//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — government employees as victims — diminished mental capacity

Where a defendant made threatening phone calls to an iman and numerous federal officials and threatened to blow up an entire city block, an upward adjustment because the victim was a government officer was appropriate.

“At sentencing, Conaway argued that § 3A1.2 was inapplicable because his threats were simply ‘a general harangue against anybody and everybody,’ as opposed to anything designed to target law enforcement. The district court disagreed, finding specifically that Conaway’s entire elaborate plan hinged on the appearance of law enforcement at his residence to enable him to ‘put on the show.’ The court also concluded that Conaway’s claim that he was indifferent to who was on the receiving end of his threats ran ‘counter to the evidence,’ which showed that it was clearly part and parcel of his plan to draw in law enforcement with his bomb hoax.

“We see no error in the factual findings of the district court. The record amply demonstrates that from the time Conaway set his plan in motion—with Facebook posts and phone calls to top-level state and federal officials—he anticipated a response from law enforcement. When that response came, he escalated his behavior with continuing threats and occasional countdowns to a supposed bomb detonation. This demonstrates that Conaway was ‘motivated’ by the fact that his victims were government officers and not simply bystanders on his block, whom he could have threatened without an elaborate plan to draw countless state and federal agencies to his home using incendiary threats to kill President Obama and incite violence against Muslims.”

We likewise reject defendant’s contentions that his diminished mental capacity is a mitigating factor, and that the district court failed to adequately account for the overwhelming evidence that his mental illness contributed to the offense.

Affirmed.

11-3246 U.S. v. Conaway

Southern District of Illinois, Herndon, C.J., Rovner, J.

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