Defendant Taken Advantage Of -- Family Circumstances -- Non-Guidelines Sentence

United States v. Morillo, No. 08-CR-920 (JBW), 2009 WL 3174096 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2009)

Quick note:

Morillo pled guilty to importing heroin into the United States, for which she faced an advisory Guidelines range of imprisonment of between 37 to 46 months after the saftey valve was taken into consideration.  The district court, however, sentenced her to 24 months imprisonment because the offense:

appears to have been an aberrational crime that was committed at the behest of drug smugglers seeking to take advantage of the relative youth and immaturity of this defendant, in light of her financial circumstances and desire to support her young child. She is young and capable of leading a productive and law-abiding life. Her expressions of contrition appear sincere. Her son is in the care of a family friend in the Dominican Republic; the son's father is not involved in the child's care and provides no support. Matos Morillo's mother is undergoing treatment for cancer and is unable to help with the child's care. It is desirable that the defendant resume custody and care of her child and assist her sick mother. A sentence of 24 months reflects the seriousness of the offense, and will promote respect for the law and provide just punishment.

Non-5K Cooperation Leads (In Part) To A Non-Guidelines Sentence

United States v. Baldev, No. 08-CR-868 (JBW), 2009 WL 2878445 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2009)

A quick note:

Baldev pled guilty to count two of a five-count indictment, which charged that he, together with others, conspired to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana.  For that offense, Baldev faced an advisory Guidelines range of 18 to 24 months imprisonment.  The court, however, sentenced him to time served, which amounted to more than six and a half months imprisonment.  Why?  Because: (1) Baldev's "involvement in the conspiracy was limited and brief in duration"; (2) it was his first offense; (3) he has serious medical conditions that require treatment; and (4) perhaps most importantly, he provided information to the Government, although that information did not result in a 5K letter.

20:1 Crack/Powder Ratio and Difficult Family Circumstances

United States v. Dozier, No. S2 Cr. 008-01 (RWS), 2009 WL 2870079 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 3, 2009)

Dozier was convicted of one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with an intent to distribute crack cocaine, for which he faced life imprisonment (offense level 44 and criminal history category III).  But this is a sentencing world in which courts nationwide are starting to recognize that the disparity between crack and powder cocaine sentences is unjustified.  And that's precisely what the court did here: It sentenced Dozier to 210 months imprisonment.  It's an objectively long sentence; but it's not life imprisonment.

More specifically, the court used a 20:1 (rather than 100:1) ratio, and considered several other 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including that Dozier's "involvement in a drug conspiracy appears the result of difficult family and economic circumstances, including a father who was frequently absent from home.  He is also the father to an 18 month old son and has expressed a desire to be rejoined with him and his family."

Sick Wife and Rehabilitation = Non-Guidelines Sentence

United States v. Saines, No. 07-CR-522 (JBW), 2009 WL 1851003 (E.D.N.Y. June 29, 2009)

Short Note:

Saines pled pled guilty to a single-count information charging a structuring offense, for which he faced an advisory Guidelines range of 24 to 30 months imprisonment.  He was sentenced to 3 years probation..

Why?  "While the offense is serious, the defendant has demonstrated rehabilitation during the previous two years of supervision.  His presence at home will allow him to continue to care for his wife, who is severely ill."

United States v. Saines, No. 07-CR-522 (JBW), 2009 WL 1851003 (E.D.N.Y. June 29, 2009)

Short Note:

Saines pled pled guilty to a single-count information charging a structuring offense, for which he faced an advisory Guidelines range of 24 to 30 months imprisonment.  He was sentenced to 3 years probation..

Why?  "While the offense is serious, the defendant has demonstrated rehabilitation during the previous two years of supervision.  His presence at home will allow him to continue to care for his wife, who is severely ill."

A Good Man Catches A Break

United States v. Medeiros, No. 08-CR-0696 (JBW), 2009 WL 1764981 (E.D.N.Y. June 18, 2009)

Short Note:

Medeiros pled guilty to illegal re-entry into the United States.an offense for which he faced an advisory Guidelines range of 70 to 87 months imprisonment.  He received a sentence of 24 months home detention.

Why?  "Important considerations include the defendant's good work history, his college education and intelligence, and his support of his family.  He has been caring for his wife, who suffers from a serious health condition."  Oh, and there's the likely post-release deportation too.

Bottom End Of The Guidelines For "Primary Caregiver"

United States v. Dey, No. 07-CR-725 (JBW), 2009 WL 1720956 (E.D.N.Y. June 18, 2009)

Short Note:

Dey pled guilty certain gambling offenses, and faced an advisory Guidelines range of 6 to 12 months imprisonment (Zone B).  He received a sentence of 6 months home detention.  Why?  "While the offense is serious, the defendant is the primary caregiver for his children and demonstrated a good work history prior to his becoming disables due to beng hit by a car."

A Truly Sad Story And A Non-Guidelines Sentence

United States v. Torres, No. 08 Cr. 1062-01 (RWS), 2009 WL 1619640 (S.D.N.Y. June 4, 2009)

Torres pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute crack.  Based on her advisory Guidelines offense level of 23 and criminal history category of VI (which was based on 15 total criminal history points that, in turn, was based on 19 arrests/convictions), Torres faced an advisory Guidelines range of imprisonment of between 92 and 115 months.  She was, however, sentenced to 36 months imprisonment based on her extraordinarily sad personal history, which bears quoting in full here:

Torres has led an extremely difficult life. She was one of six children born of a relationship between a mother who struggled with drug abuse and an absentee father. She was raised by a grandmother who was verbally abusive and abused alcohol.

Torres has had a long history of drug addiction, which started when she was introduced to marijuana by her uncle at age 11. The same uncle introduced her to crack at 12, and sexually abused her for three months during that time. She began using crack regularly at age 16. Torres was sent to a group home by her grandmother when she was 15, but has lived on the streets or with friends and associates since she was 16.

Torres has two children, David, age 10, and Kriestien, age 7. David was taken away from Torres at birth because David tested positive for drugs, and she has not seen him in several years. During her pregnancy with her son Kriestien, who was the result of a rape, Torres stopped using drugs. Kristein is currently living with Defendants' sister, age 20, and mother, who continues to struggle with addiction.

Torres suffers from asthma in addition to seizures that she attributes to her drug use.

Torres has never participated in a drug treatment program. She has expressed a desire to seek rehabilitation for her drug addiction. In addition, she has participated in GED classes for the past 6 months while incarcerated at the MDC and expressed an interest in becoming a productive member of society upon her release.

Because a Guidelines term of incarceration would not serve the goals of the penal system with respect to this Defendant, a downward departure from the Guidelines is appropriate.

Family Circumstances And A Non-Guidelines Sentence

United States v. Clark, No. 08-CR-332 (JBW), 2009 WL 1617939 (E.D.N.Y. June 10, 2009)

Clark pled guilty to count two of a twelve-count indictment charging a scheme to defraud a bank.  For his offense, Clark faced an advisory Guidelines range of imprisonment of 45 to 51 months.  Yet he was sentenced to a year-and-a-day.  Why?  "The defendant has strong family connections, assisting his siblings who have serious psychiatric illnesses.  He provides financial and other support to them and his stepson, who is a member of the armed forces."

Didn't Take Much To Get There, And Sounds Like It Was The Right Sentence

United States v. Mayala, No. 08-CR-42 (JBW), 2009 WL 1181051 (E.D.N.Y. May 1, 2009)

Mayala faced an advisory Guidelines range of 6 to 12 months imprisonment for her role in a bank fraud scheme, and was sentenced to time served and five years of supervised release.  As justification for the non-Guidelines sentence, the court explained that "[w]hile it does not excuse her conduct, Mayala was in an emotionally and physically abusive relationship with Jacques Lacroix, the mastermind of the bank fraud scheme, at the time of the offense.  Mayala is the primary caregiver for her son, who, while bright, has emptional problems that require psychiatric treatment.  The defendant has a need for educational training that would be better accomplished outside of prison."

Wow! What A Variance!

United States v. Dauria, No. 08-CR-76 (JBW), 2008 WL 5459197 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 24, 2008)

Maybe Judge Weinstein has a soft-spot for a woman arrested in connection with a February sweep of alleged Gambino organized crime family members.  Or maybe he genuinely believed Dauria's sentencing arguments.  Or maybe there is an something I'm just missing.

But the Judge's variance from the Guidelines is extraordinary.  Dauria pled guilty having conspired to commit mail fraud.  Her offense level was 15, and her criminal history category was II, yielding an advisory Guidelines range of 21 to 27 months imprisonment. 

The sentence?  Three years probation. 

The reason?  "Dauria has moved away from the locality of the crime back to her hometown in Pennsylvania.  She plans to pursue her bachelor's degree.  She has joint custory of her child.  A period of incarceration would hamper her ability to move forward in pursuit of her educational, career and parenting goals." 

What else?  Judge Weinstein declared Dauria "a rehabilitated defendant."