Judgment in
U.S. v. Robert Tappan Morris
Introduction
My
essay,
Examples of Malicious Computer Programs, discusses
the computer worm written and released by Robert Tappan Morris, as well as
the legal consequences.
Morris pleaded "not guilty" and was tried in
U.S. District Court in Syracuse, NY.
The jury returned a verdict of "guilty" on 22 Jan 1990,
after 5½ hours of deliberations.
The judge imposed a sentence on 4 May 1990 and, as indicated below,
signed the written Judgment on 16 May 1990.
Despite
- the immense importance of this case to the computer science community,
- this case was the first prosecution
under 18 USC § 1030, and
- this trial was reported in both The New York Times
and The Washington Post newspapers, and was
front-page news in the local Syracuse, NY newspapers,
the judge did not issue a formal opinion
that discussed the facts and law of this case.
Instead, the judge filled out a five-page form
(Form AO 245 S)
and added a 1½-page Addendum that discussed why he imposed
a lesser sentence than recommended by the sentencing guidelines.
The Judgment of the trial court in the case of
U.S. v. Robert Tappan Morris was not published and I
could not find it in a search on the Internet in June 2002.
Because I believe that this historical document should be readily available,
I acquired a paper copy from the microfilm record from the
U.S. National Archives, scanned it, used optical character
recognition software to convert the document to ASCII text,
formatted the text in HTML, and posted it on the Internet at
I set the form language in proportionally spaced font,
while the specific text written by the judge for this case
is in monospaced font.
I have omitted both the defendant's personal data and the form
language not applicable to this case (i.e., a box on the form was
not checked by the judge).
Ronald B. Standler
14 August 2002
United States District Court
Northern District of New York
U.S. v. Robert Tappan Morris
Case Number 89-CR-139
Defendant's Attorney:
THE DEFENDANT
was found guilty on
after a plea of not guilty.
Accordingly, the defendant is adjudged guilty of such count(s),
which involve the following offenses:
The defendant is sentenced as provided in pages 2 through of this Judgment.
The sentence is Imposed pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.
The mandatory special assessment is included in the portion of this Judgment
that imposes a fine.
Date of Imposition of Sentence:
[signed]
[Page 2 of 7]
PROBATION
The defendant is hereby placed on probation for a term of
While on probation, the defendant shall not commit another Federal, state,
or local crime and shall comply with the standard conditions that
have been adopted by this court (set forth on the following page). If this
Judgment imposes a fine or a restitution obligation, it shall be a condition
of probation that the defendant pay any such fine or restitution.
The defendant shall comply with the following additional conditions:
[Page 3 of 7]
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF SUPERVISION
While the defendant is on probation or supervised release pursuant
to this Judgment:
- The defendant shall not commit another Federal, state or local crime;
- the defendant shall not leave the judicial district without the
permission of the court or probation officer;
- the defendant shall report to the probation officer as directed
by the court or probation officer and shall submit a truthful and
complete written report within the first five days of each month;
- the defendant shall answer truthfully all inquiries by the probation
officer and follow the Instructions of the probation officer;
- the defendant shall support his or her dependents and meet other
family responsibilities;
- the defendant shall work regularly at a lawful occupation unless
excused by the probation officer for schooling, training,
or other acceptable reasons;
- the defendant shall notify the probation officer within seventy-two hours
of any change in residence or employment;
- the defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not
purchase, possess, use, distribute, or administer any narcotic
or other controlled substance, or any paraphernalia related to
such substances, except as prescribed by a physician;
- the defendant shall not frequent places where controlled substances are
illegally sold, used, distributed, or administered;
- the defendant shall not associate with any persons engaged in
criminal activity, and shall not associate with any person convicted
of a felony unless granted permission to do so by the probation officer;
- the defendant shall permit a probation officer to visit him or her
at any time at home or elsewhere and shall permit confiscation of any
contraband observed in plain view by the probation officer;
- the defendant shall notify the probation officer within seventy-two hours
of being arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer;
- the defendant shall not enter into any agreement to act as an informer
or a special agent of a law enforcement agency without the permission of the court;
- as directed by the probation officer, the defendant shall notify
third parties of risks that may be occasioned by the defendant's
criminal record or personal history or characteristics,
and shall permit the probation officer to make such notifications
and to confirm the defendant's compliance with such notification requirement.
These conditions are in addition to any other conditions imposed by this Judgment.
[Page 4 of 7]
FINE WITH SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
The defendant shall pay to the United States the sum of
consisting of a fine of
and a special assessment of
These amounts are the totals of the fines and assessments imposed
on Individual counts, as follows:
This sum shall be paid as follows:
[Page 5 of 7]
RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE, OR
OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE JUDGMENT
[Page 6 of 7]
ADDENDUM
-
-
-
[Page 7 of 7]
[End of Document]
this document is at
14 August 2002
read the
appellate opinion, which was
published at 928 F.2d 504
return to my essay,
Examples of Malicious Computer Programs
go to my
homepage
