Former Apple Lawyer Gene Levoff Avoids Prison After Insider Trading Conviction - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Former Apple Lawyer Gene Levoff Avoids Prison After Insider Trading Conviction

Former Apple director of corporate law Gene Levoff was today sentenced to a fine and four years of probation for insider trading, according to Bloomberg. Levoff was facing up to two years in prison, but he will avoid time behind bars.

apple logo cash feature
Levoff's role at Apple was supposed to include ensuring that Apple employees were compliant with the company's insider trading policies, including enforcement of "blackout periods" around Apple's earnings reports, but he ended up committing the crime he was meant to police.

Due to his position, Levoff was given access to Apple's earnings results before they were made available to the public, and he used the information to buy Apple shares prior to better-than-expected results, and sell shares when there were weaker-than-expected earnings. Levoff earned around $277,000, and avoided losses of around $377,000 before he was fired by Apple in 2018.

Levoff last June pleaded guilty to six counts of securities fraud for insider trading, and his sentencing took place today. In addition to four years probation, Levoff will pay approximately $604,000.

Federal prosecutors argued that Levoff should be sent to prison for insider trading to deter other corporate executives from committing a similar crime, but the judge overseeing the case said that he didn't feel it was necessary because Levoff lost his job and will no longer be able to practice law.

Top Rated Comments

30 months ago

Levoff's role at Apple was supposed to include (https://www.macrumors.com/2019/02/13/apples-gene-levoff-charged-insider-trading/) ensuring that Apple employees were compliant with the company's insider trading policies, including enforcement of "blackout periods" around Apple's earnings reports, but he ended up committing the crime he was meant to police.
You were the Chosen One! It was said that you would destroy the insider traders, not join them!
Score: 26 Votes (Like | Disagree)
30 months ago

Federal prosecutors argued that Levoff should be sent to prison for insider trading to deter other corporate executives from committing a similar crime
This is the problem with so many prosecutors. It’s impossible to serve justice for a particular crime when you’re trying to make an example of somebody.

By definition, making an example of somebody results in that person being dealt a punishment that does not fit the crime.

Note: I am not suggesting society goes easy on white collar crime; it is a terrible crime with real victims, I am simply advocating for justice. Inflated sentencing is a terrible disservice to any moral society and is, itself, a crime.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Veinticinco Avatar
30 months ago
A salary/bonus/perks worth millions and he threw it all away for a relatively measly couple of hundred grand, thinking he'd get away with it. The greed, the arrogance, the stupidity.

Epitomises why lawyers have such a bad reputation as human beings.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
coffeemilktea Avatar
30 months ago
Former director of corporate law? Not even a TV show writer could pack this much irony into a single episode of a courtroom drama. 😅
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
30 months ago

By definition, making an example of somebody means that that person will have a punishment that does not fit the crime.
It was literally at the discretion of the judge, which means it was within range of a fitting punishment. He wasn't just "somebody" convicted of insider trading, he was the guy in charge making sure no one was committing insider trading.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
KENESS Avatar
30 months ago

By definition, making an example of somebody means that that person will have a punishment that does not fit the crime.
Making an example of somebody doesn't HAVE to mean they are getting excessively punished. It can just as easily mean that they aren't getting off light.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)