Citing his good behavior while on the lam and admission of guilt, a slim majority of the Utah Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that "preppy bandit" Adam Galli should not have been sentenced to three consecutive prison terms.

The justices also reversed a lower court order requiring Galli to reimburse his family for the $40,000 they forfeited when he jumped bail. However, the high court rejected Galli's contention that his confession was coerced.In a 20-page opinion notable for its qualified agreement and contentious dissent, the Supreme Court found that two district judges abused their discretion when they imposed two consecutive five-to-life prison terms on Galli after he had already been sentenced to one five-to-life term.

Galli, 30, his brother Aaron, and cousins Nathan and Christopher Galli, were accused of committing a string of armed robberies in the Salt Lake area during 1992. They became known as the "preppy bandits" because of their stylish collegiate appearance.

Adam Galli was also accused in the killing of Green Parrot Cafe cook Merrit Riordan during that same year, but the charges against him were later dropped. A jury convicted Aaron Galli of the murder, but a judge ordered a new trial, and the murder charge was dismissed.

After his arrest in Seattle on July 10, 1992, Adam Galli was returned to Salt Lake City to face the armed robbery charges. He fled the state while out on bail in November and was recaptured three years later in Minnesota following a nationwide manhunt.

Back in Utah, he entered conditional pleas of guilty to three armed robbery charges and was sentenced by three separate judges. On appeal, he argued his confession was coerced, the consecutive sentences were inappropriate and the $40,000 restitution order was improper.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Richard Howe said there was no evidence that the tactics used by the detectives who interrogated Galli "were sufficiently coercive to overcome Galli's free will and spirit."

However, Howe said the lower court judges abused their discretion in imposing consecutive sentences. While Galli's flight from justice reflected badly on his character, the judges should have considered some mitigating facts, he said.

"He voluntarily confessed and admitted responsibility for the crimes he committed. The record suggests that he has expressed a commitment and hope to improve himself. In addition, while in Minnesota, he apparently obeyed the law, helped his neighbords and was a productive individual," Howe wrote.

While concurring with the majority's ruling on the confession and restitution, Justice Leonard Russon said its position on the consecutive sentences sends the wrong message.

He said it tells would-be criminals that "they will receive no harsher punishment for committing two, three or even 20 crimes than if they committed only one, so long as after they have completed their crime spree they become law-abiding individuals who help their neighbors and desire to reform."

View Comments

Justice Michael Zimmerman also dissented on that point, saying the trial judges were in the best position to judge whether Galli deserved consecutive sentences.

And while concurring with the majority, Justice I. Daniel Stewart found fault with its conclusion regarding the coerced confession issue.

"In my view, the interrogation was manipulative from a psychological point of view, with the two officers who conducted the interrogation playing almost classic `good cop-bad cop' roles," Stewart said.

However, he said although manipulative tactics can be considered coercive, the interrogation of Galli did not cross the line.

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.