David Hanners, Pioneer Press, St. Paul, Minn. –
A Blaine hacker’s 18-year prison sentence was just and proper, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, July 5.
In considering the appeal of Barry Vincent Ardolf, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said his crimes merited the stiff punishment that a federal judge handed out a year ago.
“Given Ardolf’s serious and repeated invasions of the victims’ privacy and security, as well as his plans to continue such conduct had law enforcement not intervened, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Ardolf to 216 months imprisonment,” a three-judge panel of the court wrote in its opinion.
Ardolf, 47, is at the federal prison in Elkton, Ohio. His current release date is in March 2026, and he’ll be under court supervision for 20 years after he gets out.
In June 2010, a grand jury indicted Ardolf for a bizarre scheme to wreak havoc on the lives of a couple who had moved in next to him on a Blaine cul-de-sac. On the day they moved in, their child wandered into Ardolf’s yard. He carried him back to the couple’s home, and then kissed the child.
Alarmed, the couple called police. Incensed, the Medtronic technician launched a months-long campaign of cyber-terror against the couple. Clandestinely using their wireless router, he set up email accounts in the man’s name and used them to send vulgar messages and death threats to elected officials.
In December 2010, on the third day of testimony at trial in federal court, Ardolf halted the proceedings
and withdrew his plea of not guilty. He pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated identity theft, possession and transmission of child pornography, unauthorized access to a protected computer and making threats to the vice president.
He later tried to withdraw his guilty plea, claiming his attorney had coerced him into doing it. He said he wanted a “do-over” trial, but U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied the request, determining that Ardolf had entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily.
Later, Frank sentenced him to 18 years in prison, telling the widower and father of three that “anything any less than that would not serve the purposes of justice.”
In his appeal, Ardolf challenged the way Frank computed the sentence under federal sentencing guidelines. The appeals court said Frank figured Ardolf’s sentence appropriately, and correctly considered other relevant factors, including his obstruction of justice and the number of images of child pornography he had on his computers.
