United States v. Almazan

908 F.Supp.2d 963

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,

v.Jaime ALMAZAN, Defendant.

No. CR12–4021–MWB.

United States District Court,

N.D. Iowa,

Western Division.

Dec. 3, 2012.

Mark A. Tremmel, U.S. Attorney's Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, Timothy T. Duax, U.S. Attorney's Office, Sioux City, IA, for Plaintiff.

Robert A. Wichser, Federal Public Defender, Sioux City, IA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING SENTENCING

MARK W. BENNETT, District Judge.

+-----------------+
¦TABLE OF CONTENTS¦
+-----------------¦
¦                 ¦
+-----------------+

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦I.  ¦INTRODUCTION                                           ¦965   ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦    ¦A.  ¦The Charges and Trial                                     ¦965    ¦
+----+----+----------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦    ¦B.  ¦Offense Conduct                                           ¦965    ¦
+----+----+----------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦    ¦C.  ¦Almazan's Personal Characteristics                        ¦966    ¦
+----+----+----------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦    ¦D.  ¦Almazan's Sentencing                                      ¦966    ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦     ¦                                                              ¦       ¦
+-----+--------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦II.  ¦LEGAL ANALYSIS                                                ¦967    ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦    ¦A.  ¦The Methodology For Determination Of A Sentence           ¦967    ¦
+----+----+----------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦    ¦B.  ¦Application Of The Methodology To Almazan                 ¦967    ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦    ¦   ¦1.  ¦Step 1: Determination of the guideline range             ¦967   ¦
+----+---+----+---------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦   ¦2.  ¦Step 2: Determination of whether to depart               ¦968   ¦
+----+---+----+---------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦   ¦3.  ¦Prior policy objections to child pornography guidelines  ¦969   ¦
+----+---+----+---------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦   ¦4.  ¦Step 3: Application of § 3553(a) factors                ¦970   ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦a.  ¦The nature and circumstances of the offense       ¦971   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦b.  ¦Almazan's history and characteristics             ¦972   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦c.  ¦The need for the sentence imposed                 ¦974   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦d.  ¦The kinds of sentences available                  ¦975   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦e.  ¦Any pertinent policy statement                    ¦975   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦f.  ¦The need to avoid unwarranted disparities         ¦975   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦g.  ¦The need to provide restitution                   ¦976   ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦    ¦    ¦   ¦h.  ¦Summary of § 3553(a) factors                     ¦976   ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦      ¦                                                             ¦       ¦
+------+-------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦III.  ¦CONCLUSION                                                   ¦976    ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Defendant Jaime Almazan came before me for sentencing on November 30, 2012, after being convicted by a jury of producing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and 2251(e). I previously categorically rejected one child pornography sentencing guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2, in United States v. Beiermann, 599 F.Supp.2d 1087 (N.D.Iowa 2009), and another, U.S.S.G. § 2G2.1, in United States v. Jacob, 631 F.Supp.2d 1099 (N.D.Iowa 2009). Almazan moved for a downward variance from his advisory guideline sentencing range based on “the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of this particular defendant.” Defendant's Br. at 2. Almazan argued that the advisory guideline sentencing range in this case is excessive under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and requested that I vary down to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 180 months imprisonment. While I continue to conclude that U.S.S.G. § 2G2.1 can be rejected on categorical policy grounds, in considering the seriousness and circumstances of Almazan's crime, I did not find that application of that guideline, here, yields an excessive sentence, but concluded that a sentence within the advisory guideline sentence range was “sufficient, but not greater than necessary” to accomplish the goals of sentencing, in light of all of the pertinent factors. See18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Accordingly, I denied Almazan's motion for a downward variance. I now enter this written explanation of my rationale for a sentence tailored to Almazan's circumstances in light of the applicable guidelines and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Unfortunately for Jamie Almazan, this resulted in a sentence at the statutory maximum of 360 months.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. The Charges and Trial

In a single-count Indictment returned on February 23, 2012, defendant Jaime Almazan was charged with producing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and 2251(e). Trial commenced on September 21, 2012. On September 24, 2012, the jury returned a verdict in which it found Almazan guilty of the charged offense. They did so in the quickest verdict I have ever had as a federal district court judge-less than 20 minutes.

B. Offense Conduct

Between July 2011 and October 2011, Almazan, who was 45–46 years old, engaged in a sexual relationship with his 12–13 year old niece, A.E. Almazan lived in the same Storm Lake, Iowa, residence as A.E., along with M.C. (Almazan's sister and A.E.'s mother), A.E.S. (A.E.'s father), A.E.J. (A.E.'s 19 year old brother), and S.E. (A.E.J.'s wife). Almazan performed sex acts on A.E. on several occasions. Using his Apple iPhone, Almazan photographed A.E.'s naked genitalia, and made a video of himself performing oral sex on A.E. in his bedroom. Almazan also requested A.E. to take photographs of her genitalia using his iPhone. In response, A.E. photographed her genital area while she was wearing underwear. Almazan coerced A.E.'s participation in these events through threats against her and her family, and by threatening to distribute the photographs by placing them on the internet.

Almazan's actions were discovered by A.E.J. on October 11, 2011. Almazan had previously asked A.E.J. to install software that would permit Almazan to save files to a secure location which would only be accessible to Almazan. On October 11, 2011, Almazan asked A.E.J. to save music on Almazan's iPhone. While doing this, A.E.J. synched his own laptop computer with Almazan's iPhone, causing files from the iPhone to download onto the laptop. After this process was completed, A.E.J. found sexually explicit photographs of A.E. on his laptop that had been copied from the iPhone. Agents from the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation (“DCI”) subsequently examined Almazan's iPhone. The DCI agents found a secured folder insider the iPhone containing two copies of the video showing Almazan performing oral sex on A.E., and photograph's of A.E.'s genital region, both clothed and unclothed.

C. Almazan's Personal Characteristics

This description of Almazan's personal characteristics is drawn from the Presentence Investigation Report (“PSIR”).

Almazan is a 47 year old citizen of Mexico. He grew up in Mexico, one of eleven children, where his father is an electrician and his mother a housewife. He completed nine years of school in Mexico. He is a permanent resident alien, having entered the United States in 1988. He initially lived in North Carolina and worked as a farmhand in the tobacco industry. He subsequently moved for employment several times. In 2008, Almazan moved to Storm Lake for better employment, working as a packinghouse production worker. He resided with his sister, Rebecca, and her family until his arrest for the current offense.

D. Almazan's Sentencing

Almazan came on for sentencing on November 30, 2012. Prior to that hearing, on November 20, 2012, Almazan filed a Motion for Downward Variance and supporting brief, asserting that the court should disregard the advisory guideline sentence calculation as inconsistent with the directives of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and that a sentence at the statutory mandatory minimum of 180 months is appropriate. Almazan argued that a number of factors warrant a downward variance. Specif...