Free Response - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

CHARLES M. THOMAS ATTORNEY AT LAW
11 WEST JEFFERSON, SUITE 16 PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85003 (602) 253-9051 ARIZ. BAR NO. 002620

______________________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) CR 04-1086-PHX-EHC ) ) CR 05-883-PHX-EHC ) ) RESPONSE TO PRE-SENTENCE REPORT ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. MARIA BARRAGAN, Defendant

Comes now the defendant, by and through her undersigned attorney, and respectfully submits the following response to the pre-sentence report submitted February 23, 2006 in this matter: The parties have stipulated that the defendant be sentenced separately Court's on the two to offenses. give her Defendant credit for recognizes acceptance the of

reluctance

responsibility for her role in CR 04-1086, but urges the Court to sentence the defendant to a level 17 in that case, giving her credit for acceptance of responsibility in spite of the fact that she reoffended. This request is based upon Sect. 3E1.1 application note 1.(a) which provides for credit if the

1

Case 2:04-cr-01086-EHC

Document 95

Filed 03/19/2006

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

defendant truthfully admits relevant conduct forming the basis of her conviction. In the new case CR 05-883, the defendant requests that Court sentence her to 18 months in that case and that said sentence run concurrently with the 2004 sentence. The reason

for running the sentence concurrently is that the conduct of the defendant in that case was minimal in that she sent one hundred dollars with her daughter to assist two persons. If these two

persons are added to the total number in the 2004 case, she is
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

still well within the range for which she is being sentenced in the older case. Although she is being sentenced separately for the two cases, the Court may use its discretion in determining the severity of the defendant's subsequent conduct, taking into consideration all of the relevant factors. There is no question

the defendant made a mistake in what she did in the 2005 case. Nevertheless, she appears genuinely contrite and the weight of what she did and its effect upon her family is something she is reminded of on a daily basis. A sentence of twenty-four months,

it is submitted, would be more than sufficient punishment given all of the circumstances. Defendant has previously submitted her motion for downward departure for extraordinary family circumstances and asks the Court to reserve its decision on the motion until the close of oral argument.

2

Case 2:04-cr-01086-EHC

Document 95

Filed 03/19/2006

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Finally, the defendant respectfully requests an accelerated sentencing date. DATED this 19th day of March, 2006.

/s/Charles M. Thomas/s/ Charles M. Thomas

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing was delivered electronically this 19th day of March, 2006 to: Gary Restaino Assistant U.S. Attorney Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Ave., Suite 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85004 /s/Charles M. Thomas/s/ Charles M. Thomas

3

Case 2:04-cr-01086-EHC

Document 95

Filed 03/19/2006

Page 3 of 3