Free Sentencing Memorandum - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cr-00263-JCH Document 1747 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 1 of 4
1
I 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT 1
e Ti
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIM. NO. 31_'§éf§R253 (JHQZT I
. I -·"·-· av U they
V- . ' - W ‘—2a;z:J~
: ‘ T7 2 S
DAVID M. BURDEN, (DMX) : JULY 20, 2005
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT
DAVID M. BURDEN’S SUBMISSION FOR RESENTENCING 1
I
1
I. BACKGROUND: 1
The Defendant, David M. Burden, was presented before the Court on November 1
24, 2003 and sentenced to 292 months on Counts One, Two, Fourteen, Fifteen and 1
Sixteen. In addition, the Defendant was sentenced to ten years concurrent on Counts
Nine and Ten. Finally, he was sentenced to Five Years consecutive on Count
Seventeen.
During the pendency of Mr. Burden's case and appeal, the United States
Supreme Court handed down its decision in United States v. Booker, 1
I
U.S. , 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed. 2cI 621 (2005). 1
The Booker decision dictates that the sentencing guidelines are merely advisory
and that a Sentencing Court must consider the Sentencing Commission’s intent as just I
one of several salient factors, seg 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553 (a)(5)(A), in determining whether
1
to impose a Guideline Sentence or a Non-Guideline Sentence and the length of such
sentence.
The Defendant has enclosed a copy of his sentencing transcript dated November 1
I
24, 2003 and would ask the Court to please consider this with his submission.

1 1
I
·


ETTTTTTTTTTT

Case 3:00-cr-00263-JCH Document 1747 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 2 of 4
The Defendant, in light of @q_lg and the following argument, would submit that
the Court has the discretion to resentence and to significantly depart downward due to
his proven extraordinary moral rehabilitation.
II. ARGUMENT:
The Sentencing guidelines provide:
"a Court may impose a sentence outside the range established
by the applicable guidelines if the Court finds ‘that there exists
a mitigating circumstance of a kind or a degree not adequately
taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating
the guidelines that would result in a sentence different than that described
in the guideIines."’ Sentencing guideline Section 5K2.0. T
On page Fourteen of the Sentencing Transcript, the Government acknowledges
that the Court has the discretion to depart based on extraordinary rehabilitation. The
Government, however, argued that the Defendant in this matter did not offer evidence of
extraordinary rehabilitation.
The Court did not significantly depart downward in Mr. Burden’s case. As one of
the reasons for declining to do so, the Court noted that l\/lr. Burden did not start his
rehabilitation until after the Burdens were under investigation. (See sentencing
transcript p. 29). i
Counsel would acknowledge that it is quite easy to recognize that the i
Government might be cynical as to Mr. Burden’s motives prior to sentencing.
Mr. Burden is currently sewing his sentence in Otisville, New York. His
rehabilitation, be it morally, spiritually or religious, has advanced in a dramatic fashion.
Mr. Burden has become a Deacon who has just delivered his first sermon as
such entitled "\Nho's Going to Praise God Tonight'?"


I Case 3:00-cr-00263-JCH Document 1747 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 3 of 4
He has been described to counsel as a man who is at church as soon and as
often as the doors open.
He conducts and attends Bible Studies at the facility three to four times a week.
He is described as a man at peace, who has dramatically affected a number of
inmates at the facility.
In addition to the foregoing, he has received a degree and certificate for air
conditioning and refrigeration.
Counsel would note from experience that there have been numerous defendants
that find God or are rehabilitated until they are sentenced. After sentencing, this fervor is
often lost.
Mr. Burden’s rehabilitation is legitimate and forthcoming.
None of the above facts were brought to counseI’s attention by il/lr. Burden, but
were brought about by investigation and interviews.
Mr. Burden is not blowing his own horn, but has and is extraordinarily
rehabilitated.
ln light of Bgglgeg, and the above, the Defendant, through counsel, would ask this
Court to reevaluate his sentence.
THE DEFENDANT, DAVID IVL BURDEN 1
Bw A
Atty. Timothy P. Aspinwall ~ ct #03452
3200 Main Street
A Stratford, CT 06614 i
Tel: (203) 377-7348 l
FAX: (203) 378—1836 i
E-mail: atty.aspinwall(@,sbcg1obal.net
l
l


Case 3:00-cr-00263-JCH Document 1747 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 4 of 4
I
I
CERTIFICATION
_ This is to certify that the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid, on July 20,
2005 to the following;
Original sent to:
Clerk, U. S. District Court
District of Connecticut
915 Lafayette Boulevard I
Bridgeport, CT 06604 _
Copy sent to: `
Judge Janet C. Hall I
U. S. District Court ,
915 Lafayette Boulevard I
Bridgeport, CT 06604 I
Assistant U. S. Attorney Robert IVI. Appleton
United States District Court r
915 Lafayette Boulevard I
Bridgeport, CT 06604 1
_ _. I
Timothy P. Aspanwall I
I
I
I
4
I