Court filing
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM by Jordan Nichols — USA v. Sanders et al (Dkt. 269)
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court records for the Western District of Missouri and Western District of Washington |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2025-04-13 |
U.S. District Court records for the Western District of Missouri and Western District of Washington · No. 4:24-cr-00029-BP · Doc. 269 · 2025-04-13 · Docket on CourtListener
Summary
A sentencing memorandum filed April 13, 2025 as Document 269 by defendant Jordan Nichols, through attorney John Anthony Picerno, in USA v. Sanders et al, No. 4:24-cr-00029-BP, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. It asks the court to impose a sentence of probation. The memorandum states that on October 29, 2024 Mr. Nichols pleaded guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment, charging conspiracy to commit wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349, and that the parties agreed to an advisory guideline range of 8 - 14 months. It states that he acknowledged allowing a false PPP loan application to be submitted on his behalf and received $20,832. The memorandum then addresses the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors, citing his acceptance of responsibility, employment and compliance with pretrial release.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JORDAN NICHOLS,
DEFENDANT.
CASE No.:
24-00029-11-CR-W-BP
JORDAN NICHOL’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
COMES NOW, Jordan Nichols, by and through his attorney of record, John
Anthony Picerno, and requests a sentence of probation in the above captioned cause of
action. For his sentencing memorandum Mr. Nichols respectfully states as follows:
I.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On October 29, 2024, Mr. Nichols, entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the
Indictment, which charged that, beginning no later than on or about February 2021
and continuing until at least July 2022, he conspired to commit wire fraud in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1349.
II.
PSR - TOTAL OFFENSE LEVEL
Pursuant to the plea agreement, the parties agreed to a BOL of 9, a
CHC of III, and an advisory sentencing guideline range of 8 - 14 months.
Because count 1 is a class C felony, Mr. Nichols is eligible for a probationary
sentence of 1-5 years.
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 1 of 7
2
III. SENTENCE TO BE IMPOSED
Mr. Nichols respectfully asks this Honorable Court to impose a sentence
of probation. He has accepted responsibility for his unlawful conduct in this
case. He provided a full and complete factual basis during the guilty plea
hearing. The PSR recommended a two-level reduction for acceptance of
responsibility based upon his factual basis.
APPLICATION OF 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) FACTORS
(a)
Factors to be considered in imposing a sentence.--The Court shall
impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply
with the purposes set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection. The
court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed, shall
consider
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and
the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(2) 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;
(3) the kinds of sentences available;
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 2 of 7
3
(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range
established for... (5) any pertinent policy statement...
(6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among
defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of
similar conduct; and
(7) the need to provide restitution to any victim of the offense.
The U.S. Supreme Court has specifically ruled that, in balancing the
§3553(a) factors, a judge may determine that, in the particular case, a within-
Guidelines sentence is greater than necessary to serve the objectives of
sentencing. Kimbrough, 128 S. Ct. 558, 564 (2007). Rita, 127 S. Ct. 2456,
2465 (2007).
Nature and Circumstances of the Offense
The Offense Conduct section of this memorandum has described Mr.
Nichols’s illegal conduct. He has pled guilty and acknowledged that he allowed
a false application for a PPP loan to be submitted on his behalf. As a result, he
received $20,832.
History and Characteristics of the Defendant
A sentence of probation would satisfy all the goals of sentencing. It is
the goal of sentencing to prevent unnecessary incarceration and to limit
prison sentences to those individuals who pose the greatest risk to society. As
renowned criminologist Norval Morris has consistently argued, and reflective
of the recent Supreme Court decisions, when determining punishment, "the
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 3 of 7
4
least restrictive (punitive) sentence necessary to achieve defined social
purposes should be imposed."1
With regard to the history and characteristics of Mr. Nichols, he is 31
years of age and was born and raised in the Kansas City metropolitan area. He
is currently in a relationship with the mother of his two-year-old child. He has 4
other children and currently pays $890 per month in child support.
He suffers from depression, anxiety, and trauma in part due to him being
shot and his cousin violently killed. He has been diagnosed with major
depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate; and generalized anxiety disorder. He
has prior arrests and convictions for marijuana and driving under the influence.
He has been attending weekly outpatient substance abuse/mental health
treatment at Heartland Center for Behavioral Change since July of 2024 and he
is expected to be successfully discharged from treatment soon.
He graduated from high school with a 3.14 gpa and he possesses a forklift
operator’s license. He is gainfully employed as a forklift operator earning
approximately $800 per week.
18 USC §3553(a)(2): 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
1 In The Future of Imprisonment, Norval Morris (1974, pg. 59).
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 4 of 7
5
Both of the concepts set out in (A) and (B) can be achieved without
imposition of a custody sentence. A review of the criminological literature
reveals that to the extent that criminal sanctions do have a general deterrent
effect, the certainty (how certain an offender will be deterred) of punishment
has a far greater deterrent effect than the severity of the sanction. 18 U.S.C.
§3553(a)(2)(B)'s directive that the sentence imposed afford adequate deterrence
to criminal conduct does not require a lengthy term of imprisonment. The fact
that Mr. Nichols was investigated, prosecuted, and pled guilty for his actions
should be sufficient to deter potential similarly situated offenders.
(C)To Protect the Public from Further Crimes of the Defendant
He has accepted full responsibility for his behavior and, through his plea
agreement, has demonstrated his character. A sentence of probation will serve
to protect the public from further crimes of Mr. Nichols.
18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(3): The Kinds of Sentences Available
18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(3) requires the Court to consider "the kinds of
sentences available" in a given case. Here, the Court has available to it a
sentence of probation as a form of punishment other than imprisonment.
Indeed, employing a sentence of probation will allow the Court to both punish
Mr. Hopson-Stephens sufficiently while, at the same time, allowing him the
opportunity to continue rebuilding his life and restoring the trust of his family
and friends.
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 5 of 7
6
18 U.S.C. §3553(4), (5): The Sentencing Guidelines Provisions
Mr. Nichols conviction in this case which warrants a sentence of
probation. His federal conviction will be permanently on his record and alone
serves as a general and specific deterrent. In short, there are substantial
reasons as to how a sentence of probation satisfies the concerns of 18 U.S.C.
§3553.
Mr. Nichols has pled guilty, accepted responsibility, and waived his
Constitutional right to a trial. He has been free on pretrial release for a year,
other than testing positive for marijuana, he has complied with his supervision
requirements and conducted himself appropriately and responsibly. A
sentence of probation is consistent with the suggestions herein would serve
all of the goals of punishment established by the Sentencing Reform Act.
18 USC §3553(6): The Need to Avoid Unwarranted Sentencing
Disparities Among Defendants with Similar Records Who Have
Been Found Guilty of Similar Conduct.
A sentence of probation for Mr. Nichols under all the factors set out
herein, and his genuine acceptance of responsibility, would not cause a
sentencing disparity among similarly situated defendants.
IV.
CONCLUSION
A sentence of probation is “ consistent with how the courts consider
every convicted person as an individual and every case as a unique study in
the human failings that sometimes mitigate, sometimes magnify, the crime
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 6 of 7
7
and the punishment to ensue.”2
For the reasons set forth above, the defendant seeks a sentence of
probation with whatever special conditions of probation this Court deems
necessary and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/John Anthony Picerno
John Anthony Picerno, MBN: 41861
2526 Holmes Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64108
Telephone:
(816) 471-3330
Mobile:
(816) 694-7726
Facsimile
(816) 396-5680
Email: JPLaw@JohnPicerno.com
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
In accordance with Rule 49(a), (b) and (d), fed. R. Crim. P., and Rule 5(b), Fed. R. Civ.
P., it is hereby CERTIFIED that this Entry of Appearance was electronically filed this 13th
day of April, 2025, and that a copy was sent to all concerned parties, through the Court’s
Electronic Case Filing System.
/s/John Anthony Picerno
John Anthony Picerno
2 Gall, 128 S.Ct. 591, 598 (2007).
Case 4:24-cr-00029-BP Document 269 Filed 04/13/25 Page 7 of 7File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.mowd.174450.269.0.pdf
- Size
- 208,087 bytes
- SHA-256
- cac39a9a7d442cc383054976c1b63d7ddc92bc904f526fb7285fcd21295989f3
- Original
- PACER (login required)