Prosecutors seek sentence of more than 12 years for Hamilton

Posted to: News State Government Virginia
Login or register to post comments

By Julian Walker
The Virginian-Pilot
© July 28, 2011

RICHMOND

Federal prosecutors in a court filing Wednesday asked that former Del. Phil Hamilton be given a sentence of 12-1/2 years or more for his conviction on bribery and extortion charges.

In May, a jury convicted the Newport News Republican in connection to his pursuit of a job with an Old Dominion University teacher training center while he secured $500,000 in state funding for the program in 2007.

Government officials also want Hamilton, who has filed for bankruptcy, to forfeit the more than $87,000 he was paid during his time as director of ODU's Center for Teacher Quality and Educational Leadership.

Hamilton's role with that facility ended in 2009 after it became public knowledge. Later that year, he lost his re-election bid to the House of Delegates. He then resigned from the legislature, which short-circuited a state ethics investigation into his conduct.

Arguing in favor of a prison sentence in the range of 151 to 188 months, U.S. Attorney Neil MacBride wrote that Hamilton "has shown no respect for the law and betrayed a trust placed in him both by the citizens of this Commonwealth and his fellow legislators."

Hamilton's "insidious and shameful conduct erodes the confidence of the public in our democratic system of government" and therefore warrants "an appropriate term of a severe and significant term of imprisonment," the filing added.

Hamilton's defense attorney, Andrew Sacks, is preparing his own sentencing submission, to be filed on Friday, that will argue for lesser punishment.

Sacks called the government's request "excessive and unreasonable."

"Obviously, we disagree ... and we intend to vigorously oppose a request for such a sentence," Sacks said. "We're still working on our response, but that range is too high ... the sentence should be much shorter than what they're talking about."

The combined maximum penalty for the charges Hamilton was convicted of is 30 years' imprisonment, according to government prosecutors.

During the trial, Sacks argued that Hamilton's actions were not criminal because they didn't represent a quid pro quo arrangement of state funding in exchange for a job.

Hamilton is scheduled to be sentenced Aug. 12 by U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson.

Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Virginia is for ????

Submitted by kendaddy on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 2:51 pm.

I think this is absolutely appropriate, here is a guy who secured himself a good job while in office, so lets pu thim in jail for 12 years mean while two of Norfolks "finest" kill some poor guy riding his bike, drag racing to see who could get to a call first, get 20 hours of community service. Yep the Virginia legal system has it right by golly!

Sure. Let's "move on."

Submitted by jpjones on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 10:01 am.

We got ONE culprit convicted in the ODU scandal. That's enough. Let's move on.

Randy Wright, Michael Townes, and Regina Williams lost their jobs in the HRT light rail mess. Let's move on.

The commonwealth's attorney could find no prosecutable offenses in the CSB debacle. Let's move on.

Casey Anthony was acquitted of murdering her daughter. Let's move on.

When corruption and seeking the real truth become complicated and "too hard," it's so easy to just throw up your hands and proclaim, "Let's move on."

Not Surrendering, Just Being Realistic

Submitted by Yankeebrit on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 4:06 pm.

I think this endless navel gazing is a waste of time. Those folks at HRT are gone now. Let's move on. Casey Anthony got away with murder. Let's move on. THE culprit in the Hamilton affair is going to prison. Let's move on.

This constant kvetching after the fact will achieve what exactly? Moving on means we can spend our time working on the things we can change, not wasting it on the things we can't.

Justice for All

Submitted by dafire on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 9:55 am.

If the Fed prosecutor was not asking for active prison time in Hamilton's case,the public should be outraged. The facts are that Hamilton was convicted of crimes involving stealing over $80,000.00 dollars from taxpayers and prolonged his failed attempts to conceal his involvement in the crime by electing to go to trial at taxpayers'expense. In other cases where federal defendants go to trial and are convicted of charges involving lying and stealing they generally go to prison as a consequence,and so Hamilton should not be treated any differently. If Hamilton was intent on avoiding a prison sentence then he should have admitted his involvment,agreed to cooperate with the Feds in the prosecution of others,and returned the $80,000.00 to us.

SEND THE MESSAGE TO ALL

Submitted by Traveler on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 9:04 am.

elected officials that this will NOT be tolerated.....HAMMER HIM!

and who else is going to trial?

Submitted by portworker on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 7:29 am.

For a completed Quid Pro Quo there needs to be at least two parties - Hamilton was convicted of one, but who are (as in plural since no one in a bureaucracy does things on their own without permission) the other part of the quid pro quo?

For Hamilton to get the maximum sentence, then shouldn't those involved with accepting his proposal be also charged and tried?

What point is enough is enough that "other" officials proposing and people accepting quid pro quos understand wrong is wrong? If he got a day, a year, a century, or an eon, would the others official be deterred? It hasn't worked with drug king pins or felons having guns. Does stealing a loaf a bread demand a life sentence?
Who is served best with 12 year sentence? Who learns?

Who learns?

Submitted by Charles Rhodes on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 9:34 am.

other politicians, I would hope. And since Hamilton shows no remorse, he obviously hasn't learned. He is responsible for his crime. Would you have no one tried unless all parties are? Isn't he responsible for his own actions?

And sometimes, just maybe, sentences aren't for teaching but punishment.

As far as Runte, sure she knew, but you have to get her out of Canada to try her. Do you know if the is extradictable?

I agree. The man is ruined

Submitted by 757VBin on Thu, 07/28/2011 at 9:03 am.

I agree. The man is ruined financially and professionally...but it took more than one person to pull this off. Punishment isn't always time behind bars. Agree with another poster that this wasn't a violent crime...just a self-serving greedy one. Taxpayers have paid for the investigation and trial, we don't need to spend more tax dollars on 12 years of incarceration (what's the cost per inmate per year...$100,000)

In addition, he wasn't the only one involved in this scam...just because his name is more well known doesn't mean he should be the one most severely punished.

It's time to move on.