Student
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Cause No.: 11-CR-125-RCB )
FRANCES DANIELLE SANDOVAL ) Defendant. ) SENTENCING MEMORANDUM COMES NOW Defendant FRANCES DANIELLE SANDOVAL, by and through her attorney, Paul J. Rubino, who hereby submits the following Sentencing Memorandum. It is respectfully submitted that a time-served and probation sentence would comply with all the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and would be no greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of sentencing as set forth in the statute. The Presentence Report (PSR) calculates Ms. Sandoval’s total offense level at 21,
Criminal History Category (CHC) I (no criminal history points), resulting in an advisory guideline sentencing range of 37-46 months.
APPLICABLE LAW In order to decide on a proper sentence for any given defendant, the Court must first “accurately calculate the applicable guideline range.” United States v. Muñoz-Nava, 524
F.3d 1137, 1146 (10th Cir. 2008) (citing Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 (2007)).
In that calculation, the Court is charged with determining whether the defendant is entitled to any downward departures. United States v. Marquez-Gonzalez, 2008 WL 2371564, *5 (D.N.M.
2008, Browning, J.). Departure factors can be used in determining whether a variance is warranted, even if the court does not grant a downward departure. United States v. Eriacho,
2007 WL 6364848, *4 (D.N.M. 2007) (Browning, J.). “After considering the correct guideline range, the district court must then consider all of the §3553(a) factors to determine the appropriate sentence.” Muñoz-Nava, 524 F.3d at 1146 (citing Gall). In Ms. Sandoval’s case, an individualized assessment of applicable grounds for departure under the guidelines and all the §3553(a) factors indicate that a sentence of incarceration would be greater than
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Cause No.: 11-CR-125-RCB )
FRANCES DANIELLE SANDOVAL ) Defendant. ) SENTENCING MEMORANDUM COMES NOW Defendant FRANCES DANIELLE SANDOVAL, by and through her attorney, Paul J. Rubino, who hereby submits the following Sentencing Memorandum. It is respectfully submitted that a time-served and probation sentence would comply with all the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and would be no greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of sentencing as set forth in the statute. The Presentence Report (PSR) calculates Ms. Sandoval’s total offense level at 21,
Criminal History Category (CHC) I (no criminal history points), resulting in an advisory guideline sentencing range of 37-46 months.
APPLICABLE LAW In order to decide on a proper sentence for any given defendant, the Court must first “accurately calculate the applicable guideline range.” United States v. Muñoz-Nava, 524
F.3d 1137, 1146 (10th Cir. 2008) (citing Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 (2007)).
In that calculation, the Court is charged with determining whether the defendant is entitled to any downward departures. United States v. Marquez-Gonzalez, 2008 WL 2371564, *5 (D.N.M.
2008, Browning, J.). Departure factors can be used in determining whether a variance is warranted, even if the court does not grant a downward departure. United States v. Eriacho,
2007 WL 6364848, *4 (D.N.M. 2007) (Browning, J.). “After considering the correct guideline range, the district court must then consider all of the §3553(a) factors to determine the appropriate sentence.” Muñoz-Nava, 524 F.3d at 1146 (citing Gall). In Ms. Sandoval’s case, an individualized assessment of applicable grounds for departure under the guidelines and all the §3553(a) factors indicate that a sentence of incarceration would be greater than