Opinion
Crim. No. 08-cr-380
01-25-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RICARDO WASHINGTON
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is a motion for a reduction of sentence filed by Ricardo Washington. (Doc. 56.) He cites to United States v. Holloway, 68 F. Supp. 3d 310 (E.D.N.Y. 2014), as the basis of his motion.
The Holloway case involved the theft of three cars in a two-day span. Each carjacking count was accompanied by a "924(c) count." Id. at 312. Holloway went to trial and was found guilty of all counts. Id. Under the guidelines then in effect (1995), the sentence that was imposed amounted to a prison term of 57 years and seven months. Id.
In 2012, Holloway filed a motion to reopen his § 2255 proceeding under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The judge, "[r]ecognizing that there were good reasons to revisit Holloway's excessive sentence but no legal avenues or bases for vacating it, [ ] issued an order . . . request[ing] that the United States Attorney consider exercising her discretion to agree to an order vacating two or more of Holloway's 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) convictions." Id. at 314. Eventually, two counts were vacated without opposition by the government, and the judge praised the government for doing justice in the case. Id. at 315-16. It is noted that the judge could only have resentenced Holloway in the manner it did with the government's cooperation.
Here, Washington seeks to have this court follow the Holloway court. For the reasons stated below, this court will deny Washington's motion.
I. Discussion
Washington was initially indicted for the following offenses: Count I - possessing, carrying, and using a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); Count II - possessing with the intent to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); and Count III - possessing a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). (Doc. 1.)
On May 21, 2009, pursuant to a plea agreement, Washington pleaded guilty to a two-count superseding information. The information dropped the charge contained in Count I of the indictment.
Because Washington was determined to be a career offender, his total offense level was calculated as 31, after receiving a three point deduction for acceptance of responsibility. His criminal history category was a level VI. This gave him a guideline range of 188 to 210 months imprisonment. On September 16, 2009, this court imposed a sentence of 168 months to avoid any unwarranted disparity among defendants.
Washington's case is a far cry from the Holloway case. Washington received the benefit of a plea agreement and a superseding information. Without them he was exposed to a potential guideline sentence of 262 to 327 months. He received the benefit of a three point reduction for acceptance of responsibility and a variance by this court. None of these benefits were received by Holloway.
The offense committed by Washington was his third conviction for drug trafficking, his third conviction for illegally possessing a firearm, and his second conviction for carrying a firearm while drug trafficking. Furthermore, Washington committed the offenses in the captioned matter while he was on parole and less than two years after his release from prison on a conviction in a county case. At the time of his sentencing, Washington was considered to be undeterred by prior punishment, posed a high likelihood of recidivism, and was a danger to the public. Justice was done by the sentence which Washington received. This court will not request the United States to acquiesce to this court imposing a lesser sentence. An appropriate order will issue.
s/Sylvia H. Rambo
SYLVIA H. RAMBO
United States District Judge Dated: January 25, 2016