Free Sentencing Memorandum - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

DANIEL G. KNAUSS United States Attorney District of Arizona PAUL V. ROOD Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No. 004494 [email protected] Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Telephone: (602) 514-7500

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America, CR 03-0854-PHX-LOA Plaintiff, v. Kristina Ingles, Defendant). The government through undersigned counsel submits a sentencing memorandum and GOVERNMENT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM AND RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS

15 response to defendant's objections to the pre-sentence report. 16 Initially, the government wishes to endorse the probation officer's sentencing 17 recommendation. Under all the facts and circumstances probation is a fair and appropriate 18 sentence for this defendant. 19 The defendant wishes to argue that certain adjustments to the guideline range are not 20 warranted. The reality is the defendant has pled to a misdemeanor and the maximum sentence 21 is 12 months. The court could of course reject the plea. 22 Many of the objections to the pre-sentence report have no effect on guideline calculation 23 and as such no specific response will be made. This is in reference to paragraphs 4, 39, 51, 56, 24 57, 60, 67, 68, and 70. It should be noted, however, that the objections to paragraph 39 also 25 reflect a request for a 4 level downward departure. 26 Regarding paragraph 39, it should be pointed out that the defendants in this case, were 27 not considered as joint participants in this matter. Each of the defendants with the exception of 28 Nutt and Williams were in a separate "conspiracy," with defendant Nutt being the hub of the

Case 2:03-cr-00854-LOA

Document 287

Filed 07/27/2007

Page 1 of 2

1 conspiracy. All of the others who cashed or attempted to cash checks dealt only with Nutt. She 2 printed the checks and gave them to the people to cash. None of the proceeds were shared 3 except with Nutt. 4 As to the upward adjustment in paragraph 40, the government agrees with the defendant

5 that she did not attempt to "escape" in any meaningful way. She did, however, violate the terms 6 of her release. 7 The pre-sentence officer denies the defendant's acceptance of responsibility based upon

8 her statement that she did not want to cash the checks but did so only after being given drugs. 9 The defendant at the change plea hearing admitted her criminal conduct. The allegation of 10 duress or acting under the influence of drugs was raised for the first time in the draft of the pre11 sentence report. The government has no evidence on this issue. 12 The government takes no position on the objections in paragraph 37. Should the court

13 agree with some of the objections then the guideline range will change. 14 As stated before, the government supports the recommended sentence in the final pre-

15 sentence report. 16 Excludable delay under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) may occur as a result of this motion or an

17 order based thereon. 18 19 20 21 22 23 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 24 I hereby certify that on July 27, 2007, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF system for filing and transmittal of a Notice of 26 Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Theron Hall III. 25 27 S/Paul V. Rood 28
2

Respectfully submitted this 27th day of July, 2007. DANIEL G. KNAUSS United States Attorney District of Arizona S/Paul V. Rood PAUL V. ROOD Assistant U.S. Attorney

Case 2:03-cr-00854-LOA

Document 287

Filed 07/27/2007

Page 2 of 2