Sentencing — fraud

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — fraud

A 210-month prison sentence for stealing more than $6 million was not unreasonable, even if the victims received restitution.

“In response to Harris’ argument that a long sentence would be unreasonable compared to similar cases because her victims received restitution, the court noted that Harris’ victims were not made whole in every respect and that ‘[t]his argument fails to take into account many of the intangibles in this case that we’ve heard about in terms of the losses felt by the victims.’ The court also noted ‘how the defendant wove herself in the fabric of the victims’ lives through her hugs and kisses and assurances, these sales tactics that made them trust the defendant and believe in her, and her criminal acts of fraud and deception that ultimately left them so devastated.’”

“Given the court’s thorough consideration of the specific circumstances of Harris’ crime, the court imposed a reasonable sentence in light of the section 3553(a) factors and adequately explained its consideration of those factors. Harris’ arguments on appeal do not overcome our presumption that the within-guideline sentence was reasonable.”

Affirmed.

12-1470 U.S. v. Harris

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Herndon, J., Hamilton, J.