United States v. Thomas
| Decision Date | 08 December 2017 |
| Docket Number | 16-CR-147 (WFK) |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. BERNARD THOMAS, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
On October 21, 2016, a jury found Bernard Thomas ("Defendant") guilty of one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The Court now sentences Defendant and provides a complete statement of reasons pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2) of those factors set forth by Congress and the President and contained in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). For the reasons discussed below, Defendant is hereby sentenced to 51 months of incarceration, 3 years of supervised release, and payment of a $100.00 special assessment.
On March 25, 2016, the United States filed an Indictment charging Defendant with one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). ECF No. 7. Beginning on August 1, 2016, Defendant was tried by a jury on the sole count of the Indictment in front of the Honorable Edward R. Korman. See ECF Nos. 64-66. On August 3, 2016, the jury reported it was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, and Judge Korman declared a mistrial. ECF No. 66. The matter was subsequently transferred to this Court.
On September 9, 2016, the Government filed a Superseding Indictment charging Defendant with one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). ECF No. 79. Defendant was thereafter tried in this Court on the sole count of the Superseding Indictment and, on October 21, 2016, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. ECF No. 101.
The Court hereby sentences Defendant and sets forth its reasons for Defendant's sentence using the rubric of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2).
18 U.S.C. § 3553 outlines the procedures for imposing a sentence in a criminal case. If and when a district court chooses to impose a sentence outside of the Sentencing Guidelines range, the court "shall state in open court the reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence, and . . . the specific reason for the imposition of a sentence different from that described" in the Guidelines. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2). The court must also "state[] with specificity" its reasons for so departing "in a statement of reasons form." Id.
"The sentencing court's written statement of reasons shall be a simple, fact-specific statement explaining why the guidelines range did not account for a specific factor or factors under § 3553(a)." United States v. Davis, 08-CR-332, 2010 WL 1221709, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2010) (Weinstein, J.). Section 3553(a) provides a set of seven factors for the court to consider in determining what sentence to impose on a criminal defendant. The Court addresses each in turn.
The first § 3553(a) factor requires the Court to evaluate "the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant." 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1).
Defendant was born on August 30, 1965, in Far Rockaway, New York, where he lived in a low-income household with his mother and his six maternal half-siblings. See Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR") ¶¶ 57-59, ECF No. 109. Growing up, Defendant's biologicalfather provided him with financial support but was not otherwise involved in Defendant's upbringing. Id. ¶ 57. Defendant is close to his stepfather, who lives in Alabama with Defendant's mother, and who Defendant considers a father figure. Id. Defendant reports he also is close with his maternal half-siblings, although his half-sister reported Defendant is not in regular contact with most of the siblings. Id. ¶¶ 58, 60. One of Defendant's half-brothers reported he has a good relationship with Defendant and Defendant's son. Id. ¶¶ 60, 63. Defendant does not maintain relationships with his three paternal half-siblings, as they did not inform him when his father died in 2014. Id. ¶¶ 57, 59.
Defendant lived in his mother's home until he was first arrested at the age of sixteen. Id. ¶ 61. Thereafter, he moved between correctional facilities, half-way houses, and the homes of friends or girlfriends, and was also homeless for periods of time. Id. ¶¶ 61-62. As to his education, Defendant reports that he attended Manhattan High School in New York, New York, and received good grades, id. ¶ 80, but he did not graduate and instead earned his GED in 1990, id. ¶ 82. Defendant also received carpentry, construction, and electrician training in a Jobs Corps program in Morganfield, Kentucky, id. ¶ 81, and took college courses while incarcerated in the 1990s, id. ¶ 83. Defendant worked for a construction company for six months in 1997, but he did not report any other formal employment. Id. ¶ 84.
In 1999, Defendant married Lorraine Dawson, an employee of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority; he was incarcerated at Riker's Island at the time. Id. ¶ 63. The couple has one son together, who is now nineteen. Id. Although Defendant and his wife are currently estranged, Defendant says he is in contact with his son and financially supports him when he is able, id., and one of Defendant's half-brothers reports Defendant's son maintains relationships with Defendant's extended family, id. ¶ 63.
Defendant began using crack cocaine in or about 1989 and reports that he used the drug daily when he could afford to do so, often financing this habit through theft. Id. ¶ 76. Defendant also reported drinking alcohol often, id. ¶ 74, using marijuana occasionally, id. ¶ 74, and using opiates daily, id. ¶ 77, in the period leading up to the instant arrest. Defendant has participated in a number of substance abuse treatment programs while incarcerated, and has even served as a facilitator in substance abuse programs. Id. ¶ 78. Defendant has also been treated for depression, as well as aggression and anger management, while in and out of custody. Id. ¶¶ 71-73.
As noted, Defendant was arrested for the first time at the age of sixteen, and was ultimately convicted of attempted resisting arrest. Id. ¶ 23. Over the next four decades, he developed an extensive history of criminal conduct. Id. ¶¶ 23-47. Defendant's adult criminal convictions include possession of stolen property, id. ¶ 24, sexual abuse in the first degree, id. ¶ 26, attempted robbery, id. ¶ 31, multiple counts of criminal sale or possession of a controlled substance, id. ¶¶ 32-35, and multiple counts of petit larceny, id. ¶¶ 38, 40-43. In 1998, Defendant was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree, one count of assault in the first degree, and one count of reckless endangerment, after he and an accomplice, armed with handguns, forcibly robbed one victim and critically wounded another. Id. ¶ 44. Defendant was sentenced to sixteen years in custody—during which he incurred a number of disciplinary infractions—and was paroled on January 22, 2014. Id. After his release, Defendant's wife acquired an order of protection against him due to threats he made against her; Defendant was twice arrested for violating this order. Id. ¶¶ 44-46.
On February 29, 2016, Defendant notified the New York Policy Department ("NYPD") that he was in possession of shell casing from a recent shooting that had occurred at the Queensbridge Houses in Queens, New York. Id. ¶¶ 3-4. Defendant further told NYPD officersthat an individual named "Holloway" had asked Defendant to hold a firearm on the day of the shooting but that Defendant had returned the firearm to Holloway that same evening. See id. ¶¶ 3-5. Defendant was arrested by NYPD officers and later transferred to federal custody. Id. ¶ 7.
The second § 3553(a) factor instructs the Court to consider "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." 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).
The Court's sentence punishes Defendant for violating federal law and is crafted to deter him and others from engaging in similar criminal activity in the future. The Court takes into account Defendant's extensive criminal history as well as his need for treatment for addiction, depression, and anger management.
The third § 3553(a) factor requires the Court to detail "the kinds of sentences available" for Defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(3).
Defendant was convicted of one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The Government and U.S. Probation Department argue the Armed Career Criminal Act ("ACCA") applies to Defendant's statutory sentencing range such that he would be subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years of incarceration. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (). Of Defendant's prior convictions, the Government and U.S. Probation Department identify three which they contend are "violent felonies" within the meaning of the ACCA: (1) a 1983 conviction for Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, PSR ¶ 26; (2) a 1987 conviction for Attempted Robbery in the Third Degree, PSR ¶ 31; and (3) a 1998 conviction for two counts of Robbery in the First Degree, one count of Assault in the First Degree, and one count of Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree, PSR ¶ 44.1 Of these enumerated convictions, at least two—Sexual Abuse in the First Degree and Attempted Robbery in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial