Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Guided Legal Forms & Services: Sign In

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Hackman, No. 09-3948

By FindLaw Staff on January 11, 2011 1:56 PM

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

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard