ILNews

Hogsett resigns as U.S. Attorney

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett announced Monday he is resigning from office effective July 31 after leading the federal prosecutor’s office for the Southern District of Indiana since October 2010.

“It has been an honor to serve in this office for the last four years because I have had the privilege to do so alongside a talented group of Assistant United States Attorneys. I owe them and our tireless support staff a debt of gratitude for the dedication and resilience that has been displayed every day of my tenure,” Hogsett said in a letter to Attorney General Holder.

The letter provided no reason for Hogsett’s decision.

Hogsett, a Democrat who was elected secretary of state in the administration of former Gov. Evan Bayh, has persistently been rumored as a potential candidate for mayor of Indianapolis. But as recently as two months ago, Hogsett said he had no plans to run.

“The press release stands on his own and Joe will have no further comment today,” spokesman Tim Horty said. “In the days to come, we will have some transition details to share.”

Horty said he didn’t know what Hogsett’s plans were after July 31.

In his letter of resignation, Hogsett highlighted the office’s accomplishments.

“We have set new records for the number of defendants charged and the total number of criminal convictions. The office has led the nation in average length of sentences imposed on criminal defendants. Fiscally, annual office spending has fallen every year I have served, and is currently at a level not seen since the Bush Administration,” the letter says.

“But numbers alone are not sufficient to describe the office’s accomplishments. Rather, the full story is told through the thousands of victims who found some sense of justice over the last four years – children who had faced horrific exploitation, grandmothers who had watched their retirement funds disappear, neighborhoods that used to live in fear of violent gangs that operated with no regard for the rule of law.”

Hogsett said in a 2012 interview that he sought to raise the profile of his office and bring federal resources to bear to counter gun violence, public corruption and white-collar crime.

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