Paul Manafort Gets 47 Months, but Second Sentencing Awaits
The term is more than 15 years short of the minimum recommended by the special counsel.
March 07, 2019 at 07:15 PM
4 minute read
Facing the possibility of a prison sentence that would put him behind bars for the rest of his life, Paul Manafort pleaded for compassion.
Seated in a wheelchair before the judge who would decide his fate Thursday, Manafort said he was “humiliated and ashamed.” He said the past two years have been the most difficult he and his family have ever experienced. Months in solitary confinement and house arrest had taken a toll on his “physical and mental health,” he said, and his life, professionally and financially, has been “in shambles.”
At the end, the former Trump campaign chairman thanked U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis of the Eastern District of Virginia for the “fair trial” in August that resulted in his conviction on financial fraud charges.
Returning to the bench following a brief recess, Ellis said he was surprised by what he didn't hear from Manafort: an expression of remorse.
“I certainly recommend that you do it in the District of Columbia,” Ellis said, referring to Manafort's upcoming sentencing before U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington.
Still, Ellis handed down a 47-month prison sentence—a term that will effectively fall to three years with credit for the nine months Manafort has already served. The punishment falls more than 15 years short of what special counsel prosecutors had recommended based, in part, on what they argued was a lack of acceptance of responsibility from the longtime Republican operative.
The sentencing Thursday punctuated a high-profile case that resulted in the first trial conviction for the special counsel, Robert Mueller III, in his office's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Ellis said Manafort had lived an otherwise blameless life, and believed the more than 19 years in prison recommended by prosecutors would be excessive and create an “unwarranted disparity” with past sentences on similar charges. “The government cannot sweep away” the history of those past sentences, Ellis said as he delivered the sentence.
During the trial, Ellis drew attention for tense moments with prosecutors, whom he criticized for trying to publicly present artifacts from Manafort's past life of luxury. And before handing down his sentence, he took parting shots at Mueller's probe.
Early on in the hearing, Ellis made clear what Manafort had not been convicted of doing: “He's not before the court for anything having to do with colluding with the Russian government to influence the election.” Ellis appeared to question the wisdom of giving special counsels broad authority, at one point quipping that there had been “much discussion of why the special counsel” had a case involving Manafort's conduct before the 2016 campaign. But he also noted that he had heard a challenge to Mueller's authority and ruled that the power granted to the special counsel's office was broad enough to cover that conduct.
Manafort was convicted in August on eight bank and tax fraud charges. The jury deadlocked on 10 other criminal counts, but Manafort would go on to admit guilt to those as part of his September plea agreement to the separate case in Washington.
The verdict followed a weeks-long trial in which prosecutors painted a detailed picture of Manafort's luxe lifestyle, featuring his high-end homes and a $15,000 ostrich jacket.
In the years before he joined Trump's presidential campaign, Manafort cheated the government out of millions of dollars in taxes owed on his income from his Ukrainian lobbying work, prosecutors said. And when that income stream dried up, Manafort submitted false information to banks to secure loans to prop up his lavish lifestyle.
In Washington, another sentence awaits. Jackson is scheduled to sentence Manafort on March 13 on two counts: conspiring against the United States, and conspiring to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses.
Ellis said Thursday it would be up to Jackson whether the sentence she imposes runs concurrently or consecutively with his.
As he delivered his sentence, Ellis remarked that not everyone would like the punishment he would ultimately hand Manafort. But, he said, it would be a “just sentence.”
“And I have satisfied myself about that,” the judge said.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readAmir Ali, MacArthur Justice Center Director, Confirmed to DC District Court
From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readConservative Boutiques That Backed Trump Reap Their Rewards
Trending Stories
- 1Trump Taps Former Fla. Attorney General for AG
- 2Newsom Names Two Judges to Appellate Courts in San Francisco, Orange County
- 3Biden Has Few Ways to Protect His Environmental Legacy, Say Lawyers, Advocates
- 4UN Treaty Enacting Cybercrime Standards Likely to Face Headwinds in US, Other Countries
- 5Clark Hill Acquires L&E Boutique in Mexico City, Adding 5 Lawyers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250