Opinion ID: 761821
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Effect on sentencing

Text: 41 In his letter to the defense after the meeting, AUSA Larson stated that in the light of Mikaelian's schemes as related by the paralegal, he was considering withdrawing any further opportunities for Mikaelian to cooperate with the government. The government did, however, subsequently offer Mikaelian more debriefing sessions. Nevertheless, defense counsel insisted at the sentencing hearing that the meeting between AUSA Larson and the paralegal and the lies told there were evidence of the government's bad faith in refusing to move for a downward departure. The AUSA responded that Mikaelian had not cooperated fully, thus justifying the decision not to move for the departure. 42 The district court on remand must decide whether the government makes a sufficient showing of Mikaelian's failure to cooperate to refute Mikaelian's bad faith claim. If Mikaelian failed to cooperate fully, then the government's decision not to recommend a downward departure for substantial assistance was not arbitrary or in bad faith, regardless of the meeting with the paralegal.