A federal appeals court upheld the corruption conviction of former Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim, rejecting claims that his sentence was unreasonable and that prosecutors engaged in misconduct.
The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said U.S. District Court Judge Janet Bond Arterton did consider Ganim’s good works as mayor when she sentenced him to nine years in prison in 2003 but believed his corruption was so severe that a reduction was not warranted.
“Her determination not to reduce Ganim’s sentence on this basis was reasonable,” the appeals court wrote.
Ganim was convicted after a 10-week trial in 2003 on 16 federal corruption charges. Prosecutors say he received more than $500,000 worth of kickbacks and bribes, including expensive wine, designer clothes, cash and home improvements, by steering city contracts.
Ganim, who is at the federal prison camp in Fort Dix, N.J., was credited with helping to revive Bridgeport, Connecticut’s largest city. Ganim, who was first elected in 1991, was serving his fifth term in office when he was indicted in 2001.
Prosecutors said they were pleased with the ruling. Eric Bloom, Ganim’s attorney, said he was “very, very disappointed” with the ruling and was considering whether to ask the appeals court to reconsider or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The appeals court also rejected Ganim’s argument that a prosecutor made improper comments during his closing argument by suggesting that jurors would be “suckers” if they failed to convict him and that they should convict based not only on the evidence but their general dislike of politicians.
“Although some of the prosecutor’s statements here harkened close to the line of inappropriateness, they did not rise to the level of ‘flagrant abuse,'” the appeals court wrote. “The prosecutor’s statements were at least in part a ‘fair response’ to questions raised by defense counsel about the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses.”
The appeals court rejected Ganim’s argument that prosecutors failed to directly link each benefit he received to a specific official act, saying the government only had to prove Ganim received benefits in exchange for his agreement to perform specific official acts or to do so as opportunities arose. Arterton acted within her discretion in permitting jury deliberations to continue after a juror told the court she may have been fired from her job because of her participation in the trial, the appeals court concluded.
Ganim’s associates also were convicted of participating in the corruption.
