Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#: 141

Transcription

1 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#: 141 S. AMANDA MARSHALL, OSB #95347 United States Attorney District of Oregon JANE SHOEMAKER Assistant United States Attorney Jane.Shoemaker@usdoj.gov HANNAH HORSLEY Assistant United States Attorney Hannah.Horsley@usdoj.gov 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Suite 600 Portland, OR Telephone: (503) Facsimile: (503) Attorneys for the United States of America UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 3:13-CR KI v. COREY EUGENE WYATT, GOVERNMENT S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM Sentencing: July 8, 2014 Defendant. The United States of America, by S. Amanda Marshall, United States Attorney for the District of Oregon, and Jane Shoemaker and Hannah Horsley, Assistant United States Attorneys, submits the following sentencing memorandum for the Court s consideration. I. INTRODUCTION On December 18, 2013, defendant Corey Wyatt pled guilty to transferring a firearm to a known felon, David Joseph Joey Pedersen, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(d) (Count 3), and being an accessory after to the fact to the interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle by Pedersen and Holly Ann Grigsby, in violation of Title 18, United States

2 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 2 of 8 Page ID#: 142 Code, Section 3 (Count 4). On April 23, 2014, the parties modified the plea agreement, lowering the sentencing recommendation and converting it to a binding plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), contingent on co-defendant Kimberly Wyatt and Joey Pedersen entering, and the Court accepting, binding plea agreements with each of them. Kimberly Wyatt subsequently entered a plea in this case and is scheduled for sentencing on July 30, Joey Pedersen also entered a guilty plea in United States v. David Joseph Pedersen, et. al, 3:12-CR HA, and is scheduled for sentencing before Judge Haggerty on August 4, A presentence report (PSR) has been completed. The government agrees with the facts and guideline calculation in the PSR. The guideline range is consistent with that set forth in the parties plea agreement. If the Court adopts the guideline and criminal history calculations set forth in the PSR, the total adjusted offense level should be 25 in Criminal History Category V, for a guideline range of months in prison. Subject to the Court approving Kimberly Wyatt s and Pedersen s interlocking plea agreements, the parties have agreed to recommend a low-end sentence with an eleven (11) month adjustment for time defendant spent in state custody before his transfer to federal custody, that would not be credited by the Bureau of Prisons. The net result is a recommended low-end sentence of 89 months in prison. The parties also recommend that defendant be required to serve a three (3) year term of supervised release. The U.S. Probation Office concurs with this recommendation. II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Corey Wyatt met Joey Pedersen while the two were serving time in Oregon state prison, and he knew Pedersen was a convicted felon. On or about July 4, 2011, after they had been released from prison, Corey Wyatt, Pedersen, and others went camping together on the Oregon coast. During the trip, Pedersen told defendant that he needed a gun to commit robberies, so he Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 2

3 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 3 of 8 Page ID#: 143 could acquire money and other guns to start a white supremacist revolution. Pedersen had also talked about this with defendant and others while they were in prison. Defendant told Pedersen that he would ask his fiancée, now wife, Kimberly Scott Wyatt, to buy a gun, because she was the only non-felon in the group. Kimberly Scott Wyatt later went shopping for a gun with Pedersen and others, and decided on a 9mm firearm, however she had to wait to buy the gun until after Corey Wyatt received his next paycheck. On August 12, 2011, Kimberly Wyatt returned to the gun shop and bought a Hi-Point Model C-9 9mm luger pistol, serial number P Corey Wyatt was present on at least one of these trips to the gun store. Soon afterwards, Corey Wyatt gave the firearm to Pedersen, while Pedersen was at Wyatt s home in Springfield, Oregon. On September 8, 2011, Pedersen took the firearm to rob a coffee shop in Portland with another felon, and used it in an attempted carjacking while waiting for customers to leave the coffee shop. While fleeing the scene, Pedersen and the other felon were stopped by the police. Although they were released, Pedersen feared that his probation officer would be notified and he would be returned to prison for associating with a felon. Within a day, Pedersen went to defendant s residence. Defendant and/or Kimberly Scott Wyatt later took Pedersen and Grigsby to the bus depot because neither Pedersen nor Grigsby had a vehicle. Pedersen and Grigsby then traveled to Washington where they murdered Pedersen s father, David Jones Red Pedersen, and his wife, Leslie Mae Dee Dee Pedersen several days later. On September 27, 2011, in the early morning, Pedersen and Grigsby drove to Springfield, Oregon, in Red Pedersen s Jeep, which they had forcibly taken from Red Pedersen when they murdered him in Washington. Red Pedersen s body was still inside. Pedersen knocked on defendant s door and told defendant that he was in trouble and needed help getting rid of his Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 3

4 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 4 of 8 Page ID#: 144 father s Jeep, which was parked down the street. Defendant called Kimberly Scott Wyatt to come help. The Wyatts then drove to a wooded area near Lebanon, Oregon, while Pedersen and Grigsby followed in the Red Pedersen s Jeep. When they arrived at a secluded area, defendant helped Pedersen and Grigsby transfer items to the Wyatt s vehicle and then helped them push the Jeep over an embankment. The group returned to defendant s home, and defendant allowed Pedersen and Grigsby to spend the night. The following day, the Wyatts took Pedersen and Grigsby to nearby stores to purchase camping gear and other items, knowing that Pedersen and Grigsby were on the run from police. Later that day, they drove them to the coast and eventually dropped them off at Pioneer Mountain Loop, a short distance from the coast. Pedersen and Grigsby went on to murder two other people, Cody Faye Myers of Oregon, and Reginald Alan Clark of California, using the firearm that defendant gave Pedersen. Pedersen and Grigsby were apprehended in California before they were able to carry out their planned killing spree targeting Jewish individuals in the Sacramento, California area. On June 11, 2013, a federal grand jury indicted the Wyatts for a firearms conspiracy (Count 1), lying on a firearm acquisition form as to the true purchaser of the firearm (Count 2), transferring the firearm to a felon (Count 3), accessory after the fact to the kidnapping and murder of Red Pedersen, use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, and the interstate transportation of Red Pedersen s stolen vehicle (Count 4), and misprision of the same felonies underlying Count 4 (Count 5). On December 18, 2013, defendant was released to federal custody and pled guilty to Count 3 and Count 4, with the sole predicate being the interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle. As noted above, defendant s plea agreement was subsequently modified, contingent on the Courts accepting interlocking binding plea agreements Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 4

5 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 5 of 8 Page ID#: 145 for Kimberly Scott Wyatt and Joey Pedersen. If either Court does not accept the terms of any of the interlocking agreements, defendant s original agreement will remain in effect. III. SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS A. Legal Background Although the sentencing guidelines are now advisory, United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), they still serve as the starting point and initial benchmark in all sentencing proceedings. Peugh v. United States, U.S., 133 S. Ct. 2072, 2080 (2013); Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49 (2007). They are a statutory factor that sentencing courts must consider when imposing a sentence, see 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(4); United States v. Rita, 551 U.S. 338, (2007), and reflect a rough approximation of sentences that might achieve 3553(a) s objectives. Rita, 551 U.S. at 350. Thus, when a sentencing judge s discretionary decision accords with the Commission s view of the appropriate application of 3553(a) in the mine run of cases, it is probable that the sentence is reasonable. Id. at 351. In short, sentencing decisions remain anchored by the guidelines. Peugh, 133 S. Ct. at While the guidelines remain the lodestone of sentencing, and cabin the exercise of a sentencing court s discretion, id. at 2084, the Court must also consider all the factors under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), including the defendant s history and characteristics, the nature and seriousness of the offense, the need to provide just punishment and adequate deterrence, the need to promote respect for the law, and the need to protect the public from further crimes committed by the defendant. 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(1)-(2). Other factors include the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct, 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(6), and, where applicable, the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense, 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(7). See also Rita, 551 U.S. at (enumerating the statutory sentencing factors); Gall, 552 U.S. at 50, n.6 (same). Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 5

6 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 6 of 8 Page ID#: 146 In United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2008), the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, summarized the procedures a sentencing court must follow. The Court must first correctly determine the applicable guideline range. Id. at 991. The Court must also allow the parties to argue for a sentence they believe is appropriate, and must consider the 3553(a) factors to decide if they support the sentence suggested by the parties. Id. The Court may not presume the guidelines are reasonable, and should not give them any more or any less weight than any other factor. Id. The Court must make an individualized determination based on the facts, and must explain its choice of sentence sufficiently to permit meaningful appellate review. Id. at B. The Appropriate Sentence in This Case In light of all of the facts and circumstances of this case, the parties jointly recommend that the Court sentence defendant to 89 months in prison, to be followed by a three (3) year term of supervised release. This recommendation is at the low end of the sentencing guideline range ( months), after an eleven (11) month adjustment for time spent in state custody that would not otherwise be credited by the Bureau of Prisons. The U.S. Probation Office agrees with this recommendation. The parties and Probation agree that a total of 100 months in prison (including time served in state custody), followed by three (3) years of supervised release, is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to accomplish the sentencing goals under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), considering all of the facts in this case, including defendant s background. There is no question these were serious offenses, and the consequences in fact led to multiple murders. There is no evidence this defendant intended that any of those murders occur, however, and we expect the murderers will be held accountable with life sentences. An 89- month sentence (100 months including state time) is still substantial, would promote respect for the law, and provide just punishment considering the nature and scope of defendant s conduct in Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 6

7 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 7 of 8 Page ID#: 147 this case. It would also provide a powerful deterrent to both this defendant and others who might provide firearms to known felons or provide assistance to others in order to hinder their apprehension, prosecution, and/or imprisonment for crimes they have committed. An 89-month sentence would also protect the public from future crimes of this defendant for years to come. Defendant is still young, had started a productive life following his last release from prison, and has expressed a desire to pursue counseling to address his anger issues. All of these factors suggest defendant may avoid criminal conduct in the future and lead a productive life. Finally, the interlocking agreements also resulted in pleas from Kimberly Scott Wyatt and Joey Pedersen; enormous litigation savings to the government, the defendants, and the Court, particularly in the related case against Pedersen and Grigsby; closure for the many surviving family members in the Pedersen case; and justice will be served in each case. Under all of the circumstances, the government urges the Court to accept the binding, interlocking plea agreements, and sentence defendant to 89 months in prison, in accordance with the modified agreement. C. Fines, Restitution, and Forfeiture The government does not recommend any fine. Because there are no victims of the offenses in this case, restitution is not an issue. Defendant did agree to forfeit the firearm in this case, and the Court already signed a preliminary order of forfeiture at the change of plea proceeding. The government will present the final order of forfeiture at sentencing. IV. APPEAL Defendant s plea agreement contains a standard waiver of appeal. V. CONCLUSION AND SENTENCING RECOMMENDATION The guideline calculations in the presentence report are correct. Defendant s total offense level is 25, his criminal history category is V, and his advisory guideline range is 100- Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 7

8 Case 3:13-cr KI Document 51 Filed 07/02/14 Page 8 of 8 Page ID#: months. For the reasons set forth above, the Court should adjust the sentencing guideline range by eleven (11) months for time spent in state custody that would not otherwise be counted, and sentence defendant to 89 months in prison, to be followed by a three (3) year term of supervised release. The government requests that the judgment reference the forfeiture, and finally, that defendant be required to pay the mandatory fee assessment of $200. DATED this 2nd day of July Respectfully submitted, S. AMANDA MARSHALL United States Attorney /s/ Jane Shoemaker JANE SHOEMAKER Assistant United States Attorney /s/ Hannah Horsley HANNAH HORSLEY Assistant United States Attorney Government s Sentencing Memorandum Page 8