Federal judge criticizes ex-IRS tax leaker (and DOJ) when imposing five-year sentence
I flagged today’s notable DC sentencing in this post last night, and this lengthy CBS News accounting of the sentencing highlights that there were some notable comments from the judge. Here are snippets from the press report:
The Internal Revenue Service contractor who pleaded guilty to leaking the federal tax records of former President Donald Trump and some of the nation’s wealthiest individuals was sentenced Monday to 5 years in prison, 3 years supervised release and a $5,000 fine. The sentence brings an end to a criminal case that exposed the source of a number of high-profile tax information leaks in recent years.
Charles Littlejohn, 38, pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax returns and return information in October and faced a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison. Investigators said he used his position as a contractor with the nation’s tax collector to illegally obtain and then disperse the financial records of the former president, which resulted in “numerous articles” based on the information.
Before sentencing Littlejohn on Monday, federal District Judge Ana Reyes called his conduct “an attack on our constitutional democracy.” “He targeted the sitting president of the United States of America, and that is exceptional by any measure,” Judge Reyes said. “It cannot be open season on our elected officials.”…
Littlejohn’s explanations did not appear to sway the court’s sentencing decision. Reyes said courts must be an “unbreakable bulwark” for American democracy in the face of increased threats. The court’s job, the judge said, was to make sure that others never viewed “this type of conduct as acceptable or justifiable or worth the trade-off…We are a nation of laws.”…
The Justice Department’s court filing revealed that the other tax returns Littlejohn admitted to acquiring dated as far back as 15 years, and they belonged to thousands of the nation’s wealthiest Americans. Investigators alleged he mailed a storage device containing the information to another unnamed news organization, identified by CBS News as ProPublica….
The judge appeared frustrated at times with prosecutors as she wrestled with a guideline sentencing range of just 18 months and a crime that she said warranted serious punishment and deterrence. Reyes asked prosecutor Jonathan Jacobson for information on any additional charges Littlejohn may have faced if he had opted not to enter the guilty plea, but the government attorney did not provide further detail. “The fact that he did what he did and he is facing one felony count, I have no words for,” the judge said, with exasperation in her voice.
Especially in light of some recent blog comment discussions about plea deals and DOJ transparency, I find it interesting that the DOJ apparently rebuffed the sentencing judge’s efforts here to find out any more information about DOJ’s notable charging and bargaining decisons in this case. I guess what happens inside DOJ, stays inside DOJ.
UPDATE: The comment thread here started a discussion of the terms of plea deal in this case. Attorney Webb Wassmer kindly sent me a copy of the (public) plea agreement agreement (which was filed back in October 2023), and other case documents accessed from the court website. I have posted the plea agreement below, and here is a snippet of his helpful summary:
[The agreement calculated] him at total offense level 11, CH I, for a range of 8-14 months with a further reduction possible, [but] there was no agreement as to actual sentence, with the Government stating that it would seek an upward departure and/or variance.
[T]here is a limited appeal waiver. Most significantly, defendant reserved the right to appeal if the Court granted an upward departure or variance above the advisory guideline range identified at sentencing. Thus, he can appeal the five year sentence. As others have noted, that type of appeal almost never succeeds.