At sentencing, the judge said that the crime was "one of the most egregious bank robberies that I have seen in my tenure here as a judge." Anything less than the 22-year sentence "would not promote respect for the law, [and would] minimize the trauma and pain and suffering by the victims," the judge said, according to the government's brief.
Though they don't dispute that White is guilty of the crime of which he was convicted, White's lawyers say the courts still should not be able to give him a greater sentence based on crimes the jury never convicted him of committing.
"The average American citizen would be shocked to find out you can still have a sentence based on conduct for which you were acquitted," said White's appellate attorney, Kevin Schad.
"The common citizen thinks that the judicial system works in a certain way. The government charges you with a crime and you get your day in front of a jury," he said. "If a jury decides you're not guilty then you're not going to be sentenced based on crimes for which you are not guilty. But that's not really what's occurring."