United States v. Brennan, 85-CR-452.

• Decision Date: 03 February 1986
• Docket Number: No. 85-CR-452.,85-CR-452.
• Citation: 629 F. Supp. 283
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. William C. BRENNAN, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

629 F. Supp. 283

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. William C. BRENNAN, Defendant.

No. 85-CR-452.

United States District Court, E.D. New York.

February 3, 1986.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Raymond J. Dearie, U.S. Atty., E.D.N.Y., Brooklyn, N.Y. by Ethan Levin-Epstein, Kevin J. O'Brien, for U.S.

Daniel P. Hollman, Matthew L. Byrne, New York City, for defendant.

REVISED SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

WEINSTEIN, Chief Judge:

After an extensive jury trial the defendant, William C. Brennan, has been found guilty of soliciting and accepting a series of bribes to fix cases in his court over many years. This most serious of crimes attacks the foundation of our judicial system and the faith of citizens in its impartiality.

We have set forth below our explanation of the sentence in some detail for two reasons. First, many communications to the court and testimony of defendant's friends at the trial suggested that the crime is out of character. They emphasized the defendant's otherwise unblemished career as a public official and judge and his fine family and community background. Second, it is important for the public to understand that such a crime by a judge is almost unique in the recent annals of New York courts and that it will not be tolerated.

I. THE CRIMES

Six separate bribe transactions were charged and proved. Since each telephone call and trip in connection with an interstate crime, as well as each bribe itself, is a separate crime, twenty-six separate felonies were committed. Set out below is a table briefly describing the twenty-six crimes, the applicable statutes and the statutory maximum penalties.

                                       CRIMES AND PENALTIES
                                       ====================
                Count   Description of Crime       Statute               Maximum     Maximum   Assessment
                                                                       Imprisonment    Fine
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  1     RICO: 2 or more
                        predicate crimes in
                        aid of racketeering    18 U.S.C. § 1962           20 years   $ 25,000     $   50
                  2     Conspiracy to
                        commit RICO            18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)        20 years     25,000         50
                  3     Interstate travel in
                        aid of racketeering
                        Romano case
                        11/28/80               18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                  4     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                  5     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Queens                 18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                  6     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                  7     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering
                        Romano case
                        12/09/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                
                

                Count   Description of Crime       Statute               Maximum     Maximum   Assessment
                                                                       Imprisonment    Fine
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  8     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering:
                        Romano case
                        12/09/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years   $ 10,000     $   50
                  9     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering:
                        Romano case
                        12/10/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 10     Interstate travel in
                        aid of racketeering:
                        Romano case
                        12/10/80; call from
                        Florida                18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 11     Wire fraud:
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Florida to Queens      18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 12     Wire fraud:
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Queens to Florida      18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 13     Wire fraud:
                        Romano case
                        12/07/80; call from
                        Florida to Floral
                        Park                   18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 14     Wire fraud:
                        Romano case
                        12/09/80; call from
                        Florida to Queens      18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 15     Wire fraud:
                        Romano case
                        12/09/80; call from
                        Florida to Floral
                        Park                   18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 16     Wire fraud: Polisi
                        case, 12/10/80         18 U.S.C. § 1343(a)         5 years      1,000         50
                 17     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering: Polisi
                        case, 02/01/85         18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 18     Interstate travel in
                        aid of racketeering:
                        Polisi case,
                        02/02/85               18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 19     Interstate travel in
                        aid of racketeering:
                        Polisi case,
                        02/13/85               18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 20     Interstate travel in
                        aid of racketeering:
                        Polisi case,
                        02/17/85               18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                
                

                Count   Description of Crime       Statute               Maximum     Maximum   Assessment
                                                                       Imprisonment    Fine
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 21     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering: Polisi
                        case, 02/20/85         18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years   $ 10,000     $   50
                 22     Interstate telephone
                        call in aid of
                        racketeering: Polisi
                        case, 02/20/85         18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)         5 years     10,000         50
                 23     Wire fraud: Polisi
                        case, 02/01/85         18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 24     Wire fraud: Polisi
                        case, 02/20/85         18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 25     Wire fraud: Polisi
                        case, 02/22/85         18 U.S.C. § 1343            5 years      1,000         50
                 26     Interference with
                        commerce by
                        attempted extortion:
                        Polisi case            18 U.S.C. § 1951(a)        20 years     10,000         50
                                                                         _________   ________     ______
                        TOTALS                                           175 years   $209,000     $1,300
                

Since penalties can be cumulative the maximum term of imprisonment to which the defendant is liable is 175 years and the maximum fine is $209,000. It is unusual to cumulate terms of imprisonment. The issue is where, between 0 to 20 years in prison and $0 to $209,000 for a fine, should penalties be fixed.

A mandatory assessment of $50 for each felony count of which the defendant was convicted totals $1300. This cumulative penalty is required by the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. See 18 U.S.C. § 3013. Receipts collected under the assessment statute are used to create a fund to assist crime victims. See S.Rep. No. 497, 98th Cong., 2d Sess., reprinted in 1984 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News 3182, 3607.

While defendant received much more in bribes, the government seeks forfeiture of only $14,000. 18 U.S.C. § 1963. The reason for this reduced demand is discussed below.

A. FACTS

Investigation of the defendant's activities began early in 1981 when a confidential informant told federal officials that William C. Brennan, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Queens County, State of New York, sitting in Criminal Term, could be bribed. Other informants confirmed these allegations. They were, in brief, that the defendant, who was first elected to the Supreme Court of Queens County in 1970 and reelected for another fourteen year term in 1984, began to take bribes shortly after his first election. Since Judge Brennan was responsible for presiding over felony cases in the main courthouse of Queens his opportunity to corrupt justice was apparent.

Key government witnesses were Anthony Bruno, a restauranteur, associate of criminals and long-time friend of the defendant; and Nicholas Botta and Salvatore Polisi, two recidivists with substantial connections to the underworld. There were a large number of supporting witnesses. Extensive interlocking telephone calls automatically recorded on telephone company billing records showed Bruno's relationships with the defendant and various criminals in connection with the bribes. Surveillances, court-authorized wiretaps and bugging during the course of the investigation and one wiretap independent of the investigation confirmed much of the details of the testimony. Data in court records demonstrated how the cases were disposed of.

The defendant received and made bribe related telephone calls in the courthouse. He saw one briber in chambers. Witnesses such as a supervising probation officer and a probation officer in charge of a case contradicted statements of the defendant.

The defense consisted almost entirely of character witnesses who testified that the defendant's background was incompatible with the accusations. The defendant did not take the stand despite the damning testimony against him which was not shaken by defense counsel's vigorous cross-examination. Had he done so, he would have had to either perjure himself or admit that he was strongly influenced in his disposition...