Judge denies William James Viehl's motion in South Jordan mink farm case

SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge has issued an opinion saying he does not believe prosecutors breached a plea agreement in the case of William James Viehl, who has pleaded guilty to raiding a South Jordan mink farm, and he will not step down in the case.

After U.S. District Judge Dee Benson said during a Nov. 12 sentencing hearing that he was inclined to exceed the six-month prison sentence that was recommended by attorneys, Viehl filed a motion stating that Benson's decision was prompted by prosecutors' arguments that amounted to a breach of plea. He asked, as a remedy for the plea, that his case be assigned to another judge for sentencing.

Viehl, 23, was expected to be sentenced to six months in prison for damaging and interfering with animal enterprises during an August 2008 raid on the McMullin mink farm in South Jordan.

Investigators believe Viehl and Alex Hall, 21, released as many as 650 minks in the raid and also vandalized a number of buildings on the property.

After hearing arguments and victim statements in November, Benson indicated that he saw the raid as an act of terror and intimidation, which needed to be met with a more serious prison sentence. He said he had a mind to sentence the man to as many as two years in prison.

In December, Viehl filed his motion alleging the breach of plea. The government responded by stating that the arguments were necessary because defense attorneys had requested a "below-guideline sentence of 'time served' " two days before the sentencing, the opinion states.

"The government's promise to recommend the low end of the guidelines cannot reasonably be understood as a promise to say nothing in the face of defendant's argument for a below-guideline sentence of time served," Benson wrote.

Benson wrote that prosecutors made their recommendation very clear and pointed out that the six-month recommendation was asked for on three separate occasions. He also wrote that there was no way to measure Viehl's claim that the government had argued "beyond what was necessary."

"The court is persuaded the government complied with its obligation under the plea agreement," Benson wrote. "The court knew fully well what the government was recommending after reading the presentence report and conferring with Probation prior to the sentencing hearing."

He ultimately denied the motion on the basis that there was no breach of plea and reasserted that the court is an independent entity.

"Moreover, the court is mindful that a sentencing recommendation is just that — a recommendation," Benson wrote.

e-mail: emorgan@desnews.com