US v. Hackman, No. 09-3948

Dogfighting Sentences Affirmed

In US v. Hackman, No. 09-3948, the court affirmed defendants' sentences arising out of a Missouri-based dog-fighting conspiracy where 1) the district court did not clearly err in finding that defendant knew the dogs he sold could die or be maimed; and 2) the plain language of the upward departure provision stated that the maiming of a dog is enough to satisfy the extraordinary cruelty requirement.

As the court wrote:  "Robert Hackman and Teddy Kiriakidis appeal from sentences arising out of a Missouri-based dog-fighting conspiracy. Each man pleaded guilty to conspiring to engage in animal fighting ventures in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and Hackman additionally pleaded guilty to engaging in animal fighting ventures in violation of 7 U.S .C. § 2156. When sentencing each defendant, the district court¹ applied an upward departure provision found in the application notes to United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG or Guidelines) § 2E3.1."

Related Resources

• Read the Eighth Circuit's Decision in US v. Hackman, No. 09-3948