Executive Summary
- Ebony Green challenges her five-year prison sentence for COVID-19 relief fraud.
- Defense attorney cites family hardship and sentencing disparities with a co-defendant.
- Green fraudulently obtained $20,832 by claiming false daycare earnings.
- A hearing to reconsider the sentence is scheduled for March 19 in La Salle County.
Ebony Green, the first defendant sentenced in La Salle County for defrauding the government of COVID-19 relief funds, has filed a motion to reconsider her sentence, arguing that her five-year prison term is excessive. According to court filings, Green and her legal counsel will present arguments for a reduced sentence during a hearing scheduled for March 19 before Circuit Judge Michelle A. Vescogni.
Green, 29, of University Park, previously entered a blind plea to theft charges in La Salle County Circuit Court. Prosecutors had recommended a maximum of five years in prison, a term Judge Vescogni imposed during the January 29 sentencing hearing, rejecting a request for probation. Assistant Public Defender Doug Kramarsic, representing Green, filed the motion to reconsider, stating, "(The) court did not give sufficient consideration to the hardship a prison sentence would have on (Green’s) family." The filing further argues that the sentence ignores Green’s "capacity for rehabilitation and past criminal history."
Court records indicate that Green applied for a relief loan by falsely claiming to operate a daycare service in Ottawa with annual earnings of $100,000. Investigations revealed she was actually a hair stylist earning significantly less. The fraudulent documentation allowed Green to obtain $20,832, which she has been ordered to repay as part of her sentencing.
The defense’s argument for leniency draws comparisons to a related case involving Amanda Rogers, 34, of Ottawa. Like Green, Rogers entered a blind plea to theft for fraudulently collecting an identical sum of $20,832 and cited dependent children as grounds for probation. Both women were on felony probation at the time of their offenses; Rogers for disorderly conduct and Green for theft. Despite these similarities, Rogers was sentenced to felony probation and one year in the La Salle County Jail, avoiding a prison term. Green’s defense contends this disparity warrants a review of her incarceration.
Judicial Review and Sentencing Standards
The upcoming hearing underscores the procedural recourse available to defendants seeking post-judgment relief within the state circuit court system. While judicial discretion permits varying sentences based on distinct criminal backgrounds—notably the difference between prior theft and disorderly conduct charges—motions to reconsider often compel the court to re-examine statutory factors in mitigation. The March 19 proceedings will likely focus on whether the sentencing disparity between co-defendants with similar charges constitutes an abuse of discretion or if the specific nuances of Green’s criminal history justify the stricter penalty. It is important to note that for all ongoing cases related to these investigations, individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
