United States v. Mackay, CR-54-71.
| Decision Date | 12 April 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. CR-54-71.,CR-54-71. |
| Citation | 374 F. Supp. 502 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Richard MACKAY and Chester Brewer, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Utah |
Phillip I. Palmer, Dallas, Tex., Jimi Mitsunaga, Salt Lake City, Utah, for defendants.
Robert G. Mahoney, Dept. of Justice, Crim. Div., Washington, D. C., C. Nelson Day, U. S. Atty., Salt Lake City, Utah, for United States.
Defendants Mackay and Brewer were charged in nine counts of a Grand Jury indictment with mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and in six more counts with securities fraud in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 15 U.S.C. § 78ff. The defendants were tried and convicted by a jury on all 15 counts. The trial judge sentenced each of the defendants to one year on each of the 15 counts for a total of 15 years to run consecutively, and fined each of them $27,000. The defendants appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, who in an opinion filed January 2, 1974, affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence.
Subsequently, on February 4, 1974, 491 F.2d 616, the Tenth Circuit partially remanded the case for the purpose of giving the trial court an opportunity to reconsider the sentences. The matter of reconsideration of the sentences was set for hearing before the trial judge on March 7, 1974, and continued to March 8, 1974, at the request of counsel. On March 8th written statements with voluminous attachments were filed by each of the defendants and received by the court in connection with the reconsideration of the sentences. The matter was then taken under advisement by the trial judge.
The trial judge, who heard all the evidence in this case and who sentenced Mackay and Brewer to 15 years' imprisonment, has now read the defendants' written statements and examined the cases cited in Note 1 of the Tenth Circuit's February 4th opinion. In United States v. Wilson, 450 F.2d 495 (4th Cir. 1971) the trial court's failure to sentence under the Federal Youth Corrections Act may have been due to inadvertance. There was, however, no inadvertance here in sentencing Mackay and Brewer. In Marano v. United States, 374 F.2d 583 (1st Cir. 1967), the district court gave substantial consideration to "legally impermissible factors." The trial judge in sentencing Mackay and Brewer, however, did not consider any impermissible factor. In United States v. West Coast News Co., 357 F.2d 855 (6th Cir. 1966), the trial court imposed sentence of 25 years' imprisonment plus a $25,000 fine for violation of federal obscenity statutes. Obviously, there, the punishment did not fit the crime. And in United States v. Wiley, 278 F.2d 500 (7th Cir. 1960), the sentencing judge discriminated against the defendant who stood trial in favor of the defendant who entered a plea of guilty. There was no such discrimination here in the sentencing of Mackay and Brewer.
In the present case the defendants Mackay and Brewer stole an entire insurance company by means of a series of transactions reaching from Salt Lake City, Utah, to Oregon, to Montana, to Texas, to Louisiana, to Pennsylvania and to New York City. The fraud and deceit worked upon people across the country was esssential to effectuate their ingenious, complicated scheme. The jury found that the planning and execution of this scheme required and involved the defendants' intentional, willful and malicious states of mind. The trial court after extensive argument agreed with the jury and denied the defendants' motions for judgment non obstante veredicto, for mistrial, and for submission of Counts 1 through 15 for dismissal of the indictment.
Throughout the trial Mackay and Brewer were represented by counsel of their own choice from the State of Texas. The defendants were given a full opportunity to present their contentions. In the end, however, there was very little indeed that the defendants could say in justification of the crimes of which they were convicted.
The defendant Mackay was a lawyer. Whether he is still a lawyer, the Court is unaware. It is clear from the record that Mackay used his obviously good mind and legal training to devise and execute frauds of colossal proportions.
Contrary to his recent contentions, the defendant Brewer is no uninformed bookkeeper. The record shows his participation in the frauds, falsehoods and deceits. He was in pari delicto and a full partner in carrying out the scheme.
After the long trial of a case fairly presented, the jury found both de...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Block & Kleaver, Inc.
... ... United States, 10 Cir., 74 F.2d 673) ... Since in the sequence ... Mackay, 10 Cir., 491 F.2d 616, cert. den. 416 U.S. 972, 94 S.Ct. 1996, 40 L.Ed.2d ... ...
-
U.S. v. Cardall
...Thereafter the trial court reconsidered the matter of sentences, and adhered to its earlier pronouncement. See United States v. Mackay, 374 F.Supp. 502 (D.C.Utah, 1973). In declining to modify the earlier sentences imposed, the trial court set forth its reasons. Much of what the trial court......