United States District Court, S.D. New York
ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge.
On April 12, 2013, Brian Stubbs, ("Defendant" or "Stubbs") pled guilty to Count 2: Attempted Hobbs Act Robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951, a Class C lony. For the reasons set forth below, Stubbs will be sentenced to a term of 37 months' imprisonment to be followed by three years' supervised release. Defendant will also be required to pay a special assessment of $100.
On August 29, 2012, Stubbs was named in a three-count Indictment 12 CR 671 (RWS) in the Southern District of New York. Count 1 charges that from at least July 2012 through August 1, 2012, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Stubbs, co-defendant Julius C. Barnes ("Barnes"), co-Defendant Kean Chambers ("Chambers"), co-defendant Kaison Gillespie ("Gillespie"), and others, agre to commit an armed robbery of people suspected possessing narcotics and cash in an apartment in New York, NY. Count 2 charges that on August 1, 2012, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Barnes, Chambers, Stubbs, Gillespie, and others, participated in the attempted armed robbery of people suspected of possessing narcotics and cash in an apartment in New York, NY. Count 3 charges that on August 1, 2012, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Barnes, Chambers, Stubbs and Gillesp, during and in relation to the attempted robbery charged in Count 2, possessed and carried a firearm in furtherance of that crime.
On April 12, 2013, Stubbs pled guilty to Count 2 Indictment 12 CR 671 (RWS) only.
Stubbs's sentencing is scheduled for March 20, 2014.
The Sentencing Framework
In accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), and the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. Crosby , 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2005), the sentence to be imposed was reached through consideration of all of the factors identified in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), including the Advisory Guidelines. Thus, the sentence to be imposed here is the result of a consideration of:
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(2) the need for the sentence imposed -
(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and
(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;
(3) the kinds of sentences available;
(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for -
(A) the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines...;
(5) any pertinent policy statement [issued by the Sentencing Commission];
(6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found ...