Corruption in Indian Country: Sentencing and the Aftermath
Day 5 of a 5-Part Series
A conviction in a corruption case is not the end of the story. In many ways, it is only the beginning. The sentencing phase is where the consequences take full shape, not just for the defendant but also for their family, their tribe, and the community.
When I was an Assistant United States Attorney, I argued for sentences in corruption cases. I know how prosecutors use the federal sentencing guidelines to push for long terms of imprisonment, heavy restitution, and lifetime consequences. Now, as a defense attorney, I see the other side — the human cost and the ripple effects that go far beyond the courtroom.
How Sentencing Works
Federal sentencing in corruption cases almost always comes down to money. The guidelines calculate punishment based on the “loss amount,” which means how much money the government claims was stolen or misused. The higher the number, the higher the sentencing range.
Prosecutors also argue for enhancements. If someone was a leader, if they used their official position, or if they involved others in the scheme, the guidelines allow the court to add years onto the sentence. These enhancements can quickly make a modest case look like a major one.
Collateral Consequences
The consequences go far beyond prison time. In Indian Country corruption cases, a conviction can mean:
Removal from tribal office or employment
Loss of trust within the community
Restitution orders that last for years
Barriers to future leadership or participation in governance
Even after the sentence is served, the stigma of a corruption conviction can follow someone for the rest of their life.
The Impact on Sovereignty and Community
These cases are not just about individuals. They affect entire tribes. A corruption conviction can damage a tribe’s reputation with federal agencies, making it harder to secure grants or contracts. It can deepen political divides within the community. It can create mistrust that lingers long after the case is over.
I have seen communities struggle to heal from the fallout of a single corruption prosecution. The case may end in federal court, but its impact is felt on the ground in tribal government, in community meetings, and around kitchen tables.
Key Takeaway
Sentencing in corruption cases is about more than numbers. It is about how the federal system interprets conduct in Indian Country, how prosecutors use their tools, and how communities live with the results. As someone who has argued for harsh sentences and now fights against them, I know that the aftermath is just as important as the trial itself.
The lesson is clear: defending these cases is not only about avoiding conviction. It is about protecting people, communities, and sovereignty from the long shadow a corruption case can cast.