07912465217-sentancing
-
Upload
jones-walker -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 07912465217-sentancing
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
1/7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
(KANSAS CITY DOCKET)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)Plaintiff, ))
v. ) No. 07-20124-CMCARRIE NEIGHBORS )
))
Defendants. )
UNITED STATES RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT CARRIE NEIGHBORS
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
The United States, by and through D. Christopher Oakley, Assistant United
States Attorney, in response to defendant Carrie Neighbors Sentencing Memorandum
(Document 419), responds as follows:
FACTUAL ALLEGATION
The defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of one count of Conspiracy, twelve
counts of Wire Fraud and three counts of Money Laundering. The presentence report
(PSR) calculates a loss of $703,749.33, resulting in a base offense level of 21.
Because the offense involves 10 or more victims, four levels are added. Additionally,
the defendant receives two additional levels because the offense involved receiving
stolen property, and the defendant was in the business of receiving and selling stolen
property. Two more levels are added because she was convicted of money laundering
under 18 U.S.C. 1956. Finally, she received four levels for her role in the offense,
and two levels for obstruction of justice, resulting in a final base offense level of 33.
1
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
2/7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
3/7
mathematical formula to determine whether the sentencing court has sufficiently
justified a particular sentence. InUnited States v. Kimbrough, 552 U.S. 85 (2007) the
Court upheld a variance from the Guidelines where the Sentencing Commission
(Commission) did not exercise its characteristic institutional role in formulating those
Guidelines.
It is clear from these cases that the Guidelines still play an important role in this
Courts sentencing decisions. Although advisory, the Guidelines, should be the
starting point and the initial benchmark. Idat 108, quoting Gall. 55 The Commission
has been tasked with tailoring the Guidelines to carry out the objectives of 3553(a).
Rita, 551 U.S., at 348. In carrying out this mandate, the Commission has examined
10,000 presentence investigations and other relevant data. Id; U.S.S.G. 1A1.1, intro.
comment., Part A, 3, page 4 (2009 ed). Thus, it is fair to assume that the Guidelines,
insofar as practicable, reflect a rough approximation of sentences that might achieve
3553(a)s objectives. Rita, 551 U.S., at 350; United States v. Angel-Guzman, 506
F.3d 1007, 1012 (10 Cir. 2007).th
Further, although the Court specifically rejected the notion of a mathematical
formula or percentage standard in reviewing a non-guidelines sentence,
a district court must give serious consideration to the extent of anydeparture from the Guidelines and must explain his conclusion that anunusually lenient or an unusually harsh sentence is appropriate in aparticular case with sufficient justifications. For even though theGuidelines are advisory rather than mandatory, they are, as we pointedout in Rita, the product of careful study based on extensive empiricalevidence derived from the review of thousands of individual sentencingdecisions.
Gall, 552 U.S., at 46.
3
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 3 of 7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
4/7
Thus, an appellate court should look to the degree of variance and consider the
extent of the deviation from the Guidelines to determine the reasonableness of a
sentence that falls outside the advisory Guidelines range. Id, at 47.
Thus, even under the current sentencing landscape, this Court must consider the
Guidelines, and ensure that the justification for any deviation from the Guidelines is
sufficiently compelling to support the degree of the variance
B. 18 USC 3553(a)
This Court must consider all of the sentencing considerations set forth in
3553(a). These include: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the
history and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed to
reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide
just punishment for the offense; (3) the need to afford adequate deterrence to criminal
conduct, and to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; (4) the need to
provide the defendant with educational or vocational training, medical care, or other
correctional treatment in the most effective manner; (5) the Guidelines and policy
statements issued by the Sentencing Commission; (6) the need to avoid unwarranted
sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty
of similar conduct; and (7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.
18 U.S.C. 3553(a).
Nature and characteristics of offense and history and characteristics of thedefendant
The defendant lead an organized scheme to defraud merchants and individuals
in the Topeka and Lawrence area to the tune of nearly three quarters of a million
4
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 4 of 7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
5/7
dollars. As proved at trial, the defendant showed a careless disregard for the property
rights of the merchants and the unwitting eBay consumers who purchased the stolen
items she sold. The defendant, by providing an outlet for stolen goods, enabled drug
users to fuel their addictions by sharing in ill-gotten gains.
The defendants criminal conduct occurred over a span of a significant period of
time. This is not a situation where someone committed an isolated crime. The
defendant did not cease her criminal activity after the she learned that law enforcement
and eBay were aware of her illegal activities. She found another eBay account and
continued to accept and sell items she knew to be stolen. Additionally, the defendants
conduct pending trial in this matter, by repeatedly violating the Courts orders,
demonstrate her lack of respect for the legal system.
The defendant indicates that she will rely upon the previously performed mental
health evaluation to support a non-guidelines sentence. She identifies, as a basis for a
departure, U.S.S.G. 5H1.3. That Guidelines provision provides for a departure in
circumstances where the conditions are present to an unusual degree and distinguish
the case from the typical cases covered by the guidelines. Neither circumstance is
applicable here.
The defendant also cites 28 U.S.C. 994(d) which directs the United States
Sentencing Commission to take into account the mental and emotional condition to the
extent that such condition mitigates the defendants culpability or to the extent that such
condition is otherwise plainly relevant. The defendants mental condition did not play
a factor, much less a mitigating one, in her criminal conduct.
5
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 5 of 7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
6/7
Seriousness of defendants criminal activity
The defendants conduct in this case is serious. As previously mentioned, the
loss attributable to the defendants conduct is conservatively calculated at $703,749.33.
The defendants criminal conduct involved numerous victims and co-conspirators. Her
fraudulent scheme victimized merchants as diverse as nationwide chains such as
Walmart and Target to local merchants like Assays Sporting Goods and Hume Music
to college students whose Trek bikes were stolen at the defendants direction.
Deterrence
Deterrence is relative to not only the defendant personally, but also others who
are made aware of her sentence. A significant prison sentence would serve to deter
this defendant, but perhaps more significantly, a prison sentence would serve to deter
other individuals who might be inclined to engage in similar behavior, who learn of this
sentence. White collar cases present a unique opportunity to deter other individuals
criminal conduct. More so than drug offenders or violent criminals, would be white
collar criminals are likely to be influenced by the prospect of a prison sentence. A
sentence of imprisonment would serve as a deterrence to other individuals who may
learn of the sentence.
Educational/Vocational training
This case does not present any need for rehabilitative vocational training, or any
need for medical treatment that would affect the Courts sentencing analysis.
Guidelines and Policy Statements and need to avoid unwarranted disparities
As previously argued, these factors support a sentence of imprisonment.
6
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 6 of 7
-
8/6/2019 07912465217-sentancing
7/7
CONCLUSION
The sentence which is sufficient but not greater than necessary when taking into
account the factors of 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and the
characteristics of the defendants and their crimes is a sentence168 months, which is
within the Guidelines range calculated by the PSR.
Respectfully submitted,
BARRY R. GRISSOMUnited States Attorney
s/ D. Christopher Oakley
D. CHRISTOPHER OAKLEYAssistant U.S. Attorney500 State AvenueKansas City, Kansas 66101(913) 551-6730KS S. Ct. No. 19248
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 11th day of January, 2011, I
electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the court by using the CM/ECF system
which will send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record
s/ D. Christopher OakleyD. Christopher Oakley
Assistant U.S. Attorney
7
Case 2:07-cr-20124-CM -JPO Document 422 Filed 01/11/11 Page 7 of 7