Franklin, Andrews, Kramer & Edelstein

[jurisper]

Going back to prosecutors arguing for lower sentences than recommended by the probation office, another Victor Wild case (completley unrelated to LP/PDGT/etc) shows some of the detailed issues.

http://openjurist.org/229/f3d/1/united-states-of-america-v-sanjay-saxena

Wild reached plea agt with defendant; between that and sentencing, the SEC noticed that the defendant was doing new dodgy stuff; Wild felt it his duty to inform probation office; which then recommended no contrition down-tick and therefore a higher sentence than provided for in the plea deal.

At the sentencing hearing, Wild continued to argue for the lower sentence, as he was contractually obliged to do under the terms of the plea agreement; while giving the court details and his negative views on the defendant's continued dodgy behaviour.

The court went with the probation office's higher recommendation.

Defendant appealed, asserting inter alia breach of contract against Wild for informing the probation office and using negative language at the sentencing hearing. Court rejected the appeal, saying that Wild had successfully traversed a narrow line between his contractual obligation to defendant under the plea agreement and his obligations to the court.