Dickie Scruggs Asks For 30 Month Prison Term

In a sentencing memorandum filed on Wednesday, attorneys for Dickie Scruggs asked the court to impose a 30 month sentence instead of the maximum 60 months allowed under his plea agreement. His primary argument is that the potential benefit from the bribe has been grossly mischaracterized by the US Probation Office (also argued by Backstrom) and that the value of the bribe should only be the amount of the bribe. By his calculation, Scruggs claims a 30-37 month range is called for by the guidelines. While Scruggs does acknowledge his offense, the document is remarkably void of any sense of remorse, and he continues to argue about his role in the conspiracy, as he did at his plea hearing. Whatever the merits of his arguments, the tone of the memorandum is not likely to impress Judge Biggers.

The government response (to both Dickie Scruggs and Sid Backstrom) argues that the intent of the bribe determines the benefit and that even at the $50,000 bribe amount Scruggs’ guideline would be 46-57 months; further, that Backstrom’s argument is moot because even just using the bribe amount, his range would more than the 30 month cap under his plea agreement. The government is seeking the maximum allowed under the plea agreements for both defendants (Sun Herald).

UPDATE: The government has subpoenaed John Jones’ attorney Grady Tollison to testify at the sentencing hearing. He expects to be asked about the amount of legal fees at stake in Jones v. Scruggs (Sun Herald).