ILNews

Conour appeals fraud conviction, 10-year sentence

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former attorney William Conour will appeal his conviction and 10-year prison sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to a single count of wire fraud.

Conour’s notice of appeal  was filed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, just days after federal prosecutors filed a notice preserving the government’s ability to appeal a sentence they believed was too lenient given the scope and nature of the offense.

Michael Donahoe, Conour’s court-appointed federal public defender in the District Court proceedings, could not be immediately reached for comment Thursday.

Conour, 66, pleaded guilty in July to a single count of wire fraud. At his sentencing in October, he admitted to government information that alleged he stole about $6.7 million from more than 30 former wrongful-death and personal-injury clients for whom he had negotiated settlements.

Prosecutors asked Chief Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana to impose the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, and a presentencing report advised a sentence of 14 to 17.5 years in prison. But when he sentenced Conour to 10 years in October, Young said punishment would send a deterrent message while allowing Conour to have some role in providing victims the $6.5 million in restitution ordered by the court.
 
The 7th Circuit on Wednesday consolidated the defense and government appeals as USA v. William Conour, 13-3753, and ordered Conour’s appellate brief filed by Jan. 21. The appeal is to be fully briefed by April 7.

The 7th Circuit docket also reflects Donahoe terminated his representation of Conour on Wednesday. Conour now is represented by Sara Varner of Indiana Federal Community Defenders Inc. Varner could not be immediately reached for comment Thursday.

Conour is housed in the minimum security Morgantown (W.Va.) Federal Correctional Institutional, with a projected release date of March 6, 2022, according to the Bureau of Prisons.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT