United States v. Clay, 19-1223

• Decision Date: 25 November 2019
• Docket Number: No. 19-1223,19-1223
• Citation: 943 F.3d 805
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carleous CLAY, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

943 F.3d 805

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.Carleous CLAY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-1223

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Argued November 14, 2019

Decided November 25, 2019

Debra Riggs Bonamici, Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Matthew J. McQuaid, Attorney, LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW MCQUAID, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before Manion, Kanne, and Sykes, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam.

Carleous Clay challenges his within-guidelines life sentence as unreasonable. He pled guilty to kidnapping a woman, setting her afire, and leaving her to die. In a plea agreement, he also admitted for sentencing purposes that, while he was in pretrial detention in jail for those charges, he held a case worker hostage and threatened to kill her. Clay argues that he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing because the district judge based his sentence solely on aggravating factors and ignored his acceptance of responsibility. Because the district judge adequately justified the sentence based on the statutory sentencing factors, we affirm the judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

The tragic events in this case began with a burglary. In September 2015, Clay broke into the home of his neighbor, Diane Pranske, while she was away at work. He left with some items but returned later that night to steal more. As he was ransacking the house the second time, Pranske returned. Demanding money, he threatened her with a hammer, abducted her, and drove her across state lines to two nearby banks, where he withdrew all he could from her account—$140. He brought her back to her house in search of more cash, but she had none.

Clay then shoved Pranske into the trunk of her car and drove for about 30 minutes until he reached a vacant parking lot. There, in the backseat of the car, he forced her to perform oral sex on him and vaginally raped her. After raping her, he tried to push Pranske back into the car’s trunk. When she resisted, he strangled her until she passed out on the ground. Knowing that Pranske was still alive, Clay decided to kill her. He doused her with lighter fluid, set her afire, and left her in the parking lot to die. Incredibly, she survived by rolling on the ground to stop the flames and walking a half a mile to a fast-food restaurant to get lifesaving help. Clay was arrested a few days later.

Another harrowing episode soon followed. While in pretrial detention, Clay entered the office of one of the jail’s case workers, Leticia Zamora Martinez, and pretended to complain about another detainee. When Martinez reached for the phone to report the problem, Clay grabbed her arm, told her that he had a knife, threatened to kill her, and demanded her keys. Clay took her keys and proceeded to lock the office door. Martinez quickly radioed for help, and Clay responded by ordering her face down onto the floor. He straddled her back, grabbed her by the hair, and pressed a homemade knife against her throat.

Jail staff eventually unlocked the door and used pepper spray to subdue Clay. In his socks, they found four strips of cloth intended for restraining Martinez. They also recovered from Clay’s pocket a note addressed to Martinez by name, in which he had written: "I’m getting life in prison anyway so I don’t have anything to lose. Please don’t try me. My intention is not to hurt you."

For his actions against Pranske, Clay pled guilty to kidnapping, 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a), attempted murder, id. § 1512(a)(1)(C), and using fire to commit another felony, id. § 844(h)(1). Additionally, for purposes of sentencing, he stipulated in a plea agreement to the conduct involving Martinez, which constituted kidnapping a federal employee, id. § 1201(a)(5). See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.2(c). The government promised in return to dismiss other charges pending against Clay, including those initiated in a separate case for his attack on Martinez.

The parties disputed whether Clay deserved a life sentence. In the presentence investigation report, a probation officer calculated a total offense level of 43 and a criminal history category of VI, yielding a Sentencing Guidelines range of life in prison. In its sentencing memorandum, the government asked for a life sentence, stressing the severity of Clay’s crimes and the danger he posed to the community. Clay requested a term of years that was not a de facto life sentence; he pointed to his acceptance of responsibility, his terrible childhood, and the statistical improbability that he would reoffend if he were to be released decades later at an advanced age. He also explained that he had taken Martinez hostage in an "attempt at suicide by police."¹

At the sentencing hearing, the government expanded on its proffered reasons for a life sentence, beginning with the nature and circumstances of the offenses. After the prosecutor detailed the facts of the case, several persons made victim impact statements. Pranske recounted the immense suffering that Clay had inflicted on her. Her family discussed how the crimes had permanently changed her life, leaving lingering pain and depriving her of her independence. A physician who treated Pranske spoke about the severity of her injuries (30% of her skin was irrevocably damaged) and her prolonged hospitalization (she was in intensive care for 5 months and endured life-threatening infections and organ failures). Martinez and a colleague from the jail also addressed the court, describing the lasting psychological trauma that Clay had caused them.

To emphasize Clay’s violent criminal history and "predatory" characteristics, the prosecutor highlighted one episode when Clay feigned asking a woman for directions to pull a gun on her and her children. The prosecutor also pointed out that Clay kidnapped and raped Pranske while on parole and receiving assistance with housing and employment. Finally, the government contended that a life sentence was necessary to provide just punishment and protect the public.

Clay then presented mitigating arguments targeting his culpability and ability to change. Defense counsel characterized him as a broken person, shaped by his horrible upbringing, to suggest that he was not inherently "evil." Counsel recounted that Clay joined a gang in the third grade; his older brothers have been involved in the criminal justice system; his mother struggled to support their family; and as a child he experienced abuse. Counsel also stressed that Clay showed remorse and deserved credit for pleading guilty, which showed that he took responsibility and was "facing the consequences of his actions ... not hiding." Counsel asked for a sentence even just "one day" less than life. In allocution, Clay apologized to his victims, accepted that he had "made this bed" and had to "lay in it," and said that he was "thankful" that Pranske had survived. He also repeated that his attack on Martinez was really a suicide attempt.

The district judge sentenced Clay to life in prison and referenced the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) when explaining its decision.² In terms of the offense’s nature and seriousness, the judge stated that "the level of terror that [Clay] inflicted on these two women was just unimaginable." Clay’s actions, the judge said, created a "ripple effect of trauma and sadness...