Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Jones

United States District Court, S.D. New York

July 17, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JAMES JONES, Defendant.

          SENTENCING OPINION

          ROBERT W. SWEET, U.S.D.J.

         On December 16, 2016, James Jones ("Defendant" or "Jones") pleaded guilty to one count of Hobbs Act Robbery, one count of attempted robbery, and two counts of bank robbery. Based on the conclusions set forth below, Jones will be sentenced to 125 months' imprisonment, subject to the scheduled sentencing hearing on August 1, 2017.

         Prior Proceedings

          Jones was named in a three-count information filed in the Southern District of New York on February 11, 2016. The Superseding Information was filed on December 16, 2016 and contains four counts against Jones.

         Count One charges that on or about October 5, 2015, in the Southern District of New York, Jones knowingly committed robbery - at a Travelex Currency Exchange in New York, New York, by brandishing what appeared to be a firearm - and thereby obstructed, delayed, and affected commerce and the movement of articles and commodities in commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 1952.

         Count Two charges that in or about November 17, 2015, in the Southern District of New York, Jones, by force and violence, and by intimidation - by brandishing what appeared to be a firearm - attempted to take from the person and presence of another money property, and things of value belonging to, and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of a bank, Valley National Bank in New York, New York, the deposits of which were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and 2.

         Count Three charges that on or about November 20, 2015, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Jones, by force and violence, and by intimidation - by brandishing what appeared to be a firearm - took and attempted to take from the person and presence of another money property, and things of value belonging to, and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of a bank, Chase Bank in New York, New York, the deposits of which were insured by the FDIC, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and 2.

         Count Four charges that on or about January 12, 2016, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Jones, by force and violence, and by intimidation - by brandishing what appeared to be a firearm - took and attempted to take from the person and presence of another money property, and things of value belonging to, and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of a bank, Chase Bank in Los Angeles, California, the deposits of which were insured by the FDIC, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and 2.

         On December 16, 2016, Jones appeared before the Honorable James C. Francis and pleaded guilty to his criminal conduct as charged in Counts One, Two, Three, and Four.

         Jones is scheduled to be sentenced on August 1, 2017.

         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 guilty of similar conduct; and
(7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). A sentencing judge is permitted to find all the facts appropriate for determining a sentence, whether that sentence is a so-called Guidelines sentence or not. See Crosby, 397 F.3d at 114-15.

         The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.