United States District Court, S.D. New York
ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge.
On February 13, 2015, Laron Mosley ("Mosley" or "Defendant") pled guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine base and heroin.
For the reasons set forth below, Mosley will be sentenced to 135 months' imprisonment followed by five years' supervised release, subject to the scheduled sentencing hearing on June 25, 2015. Mosley is also required to pay a special assessment of $100.
Defendant was named in a one-count superseding indictment (the "Indictment") filed in the Southern District of New York. The first and only count of the Indictment charges that from 2005 through November 2013, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Mosley and others conspired to distribute and possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A); and mixtures and substances containing a detectable amount of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(C) ("Count 1").
The Indictment further indicates that as a result of committing the offense charged in Count 1, Mosley shall forfeit to the United States any property constituting or derived from proceeds of the offense and any property used or intended to be used to commit or facilitate it. If any of the property subject to forfeiture cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence, has been transferred to a third party, has been placed beyond the Court's jurisdiction, has been substantially diminished in value, or has been commingled with other property, it is the intention of the Government to seek forfeiture of any other property of Defendant up to the value of the forfeitable property. See 21 U.S.C. § 853.
On February 13, 2015, Mosley pled guilty to Count 1, pursuant to a plea agreement which stipulates the following:
The applicable Guidelines manual is the November 1, 2014, United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual.
The sentencing guideline applicable to the offense charged in Count 1 is U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1.
Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(a)(5) and (c)(4), the base offense level is 32 because the defendant was responsible for the distribution of approximately 2.5 kilograms of cocaine base and approximately 50 grams of heroin, which based on the drug equivalency tables in the Guidelines equals approximately 8, 978 kilograms of marijuana.
Assuming the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility, to the satisfaction of the Government, through his allocution and subsequent conduct prior to the imposition of sentence, a two-level reduction will be warranted, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a).
Furthermore, assuming the defendant has accepted responsibility as described in the previous sentence, an additional one-level reduction is warranted, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b), because Defendant gave timely notice of his intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby permitting the Government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the Court to allocate its resources efficiently.
In accordance with the above, the applicable Guidelines offense level is 29.
Based upon the information now available to the U.S. Attorney's Office (including representations by the defense), the defendant has fourteen criminal history points. Accordingly, the defendant's Criminal History Category is VI.
Based upon the calculations set forth above, Defendant's stipulated Guidelines range is 151 to 188 months' imprisonment. In addition, after determining Defendant's ability to pay, the Court may impose a fine pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2. At Guidelines level 29, the applicable fine range is $15, 000 to $10, 000, 000.
The parties agree that neither a downward nor an upward departure from the Stipulated Guidelines Range set forth above is warranted. However, the parties agree that either party may seek a sentence outside of the Stipulated Guidelines Range, suggest that the Probation Office consider a sentence outside of the Stipulated Guidelines Range, and suggest that the Court sua sponte consider a sentence outside of the Stipulated Guidelines Range, based upon the factors to be considered in imposing a sentence pursuant, to 18 U.S.C. 3553(a).
Defendant is scheduled to be sentenced on June 25, 2015.
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 ...