Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings United States v. Andre Lee Gaines Defendant's Sentencing Memorandum — United States v. Andre Lee Gaines (N.D. Ga.)

Court filing

Defendant's Sentencing Memorandum — United States v. Andre Lee Gaines (N.D. Ga.)

Filed September 29, 2021 in U.S. v. Andre Lee Gaines; one of 12 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Filed2021-09-29

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:21-cr-00206-JPB · Doc. 10 · 2021-09-29 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 
ATLANTA DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
) 
) 
v. 
 
 
 
 
)       CRIMINAL ACTION 
) 
NO. 1:21-CR-206-JPB 
ANDRE LEE GAINES 
 
) 
______________________________________ ) 
 
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM 
 
 
COMES NOW the Defendant, ANDRE LEE GAINES, by and through 
undersigned counsel and hereby files this sentencing memorandum in support of 
a reasonable sentence.  Mr. Gaines asks that this Court impose a sentence of 
probation.   
I. 
BACKGROUND 
Mr. Gaines is 67 years old.  Prior to this case, he had never been arrested or 
charged with a crime. He joined the Navy a few years out of high school in 1973 
and served honorably for 21 years.  After the Navy, he worked for 14 years for the 
United States Post Office.  Due to a physical disability, he was forced to retire from 
the Postal Service in 2004. 
Mr. Gaines’s physical and mental condition has deteriorated over the years.  
The presentence report indicates that he suffers from 19 different medical 
conditions and takes 17 different medications. (PSR at ¶¶ 48 and 50).  His 
conditions are serious.  He has suffered several strokes, has type 2 diabetes, atrial 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 1 of 16

2 
 
fibrillation, and seizure disorder.  In addition, he suffers from chronic pain in his 
back, neck, arms, and hands.  As a result of his strokes, Mr. Gaines suffers from 
vascular cognitive impairment.   
A recent neuropsychological evaluation by Dr. Felicia C. Goldstein from the 
Emory University Brain Health Center found that because of the cognitive 
impairment, Mr. Gaines suffers from severe impairments in executive functioning 
and memory.  Executive function “refers to the higher-level cognitive skills you 
use to control and coordinate your other cognitive abilities and behaviors.”  
Executive Functions, University of California San Francisco, Weill Institute for 
Neurosciences, https://memory.ucsf.edu/symptoms/executive-functions. (last 
visited September 28, 2021). Deficits in executive function result in difficulty 
organizing, difficulty in planning, inability to multitask, difficulty processing, 
storing, and/or retrieving information, and difficulty with abstract concepts. Id. In 
addition, Mr. Gaines’s overall intellectual functioning, along with his working 
memory, processing speed, and verbal comprehension all fall between the second 
and eighth percentiles for individuals who are his age. Mr. Gaines has been 
suffering from these conditions for many years.  He was physically frail and 
mentally diminished at the time that the offense conduct occurred in the summer 
of 2020.   
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 2 of 16

3 
 
Mr. Gaines is before this Court because Darrell Thomas and John Gaines, 
Mr. Gaines’s cousin and supposed friend, took advantage of the cognitively 
impaired Mr. Gaines.  Darrell Thomas is a fraudster and scam artist who used 
business owners to defraud the Small Business Administration out of millions of 
dollars in COVID relief money.  John Gaines is an associate of Darryl Thomas.   
John Gaines knew that Mr. Gaines had a dormant travel business that 
existed in name only.  John Gaines schemed with Darryl Thomas to trick Mr. 
Gaines into allowing them to use the dormant business to apply for a Paycheck 
Protection Program (PPP) loan.  Andre Gaines did not know that they were going 
to apply for a PPP loan, never saw any of the paperwork, and had no part in the 
application process.  After the loan was approved, most of the proceeds of the loan 
were distributed to Thomas, John Gaines, and Carla Jackson, John Gaines’s wife.  
Mr. Gaines only figured out what happened after the fact when he was contacted 
by the FBI.  Once he was contacted by the FBI, Mr. Gaines made a false statement 
to the agent by repeating what he was told to say by Mr. Thomas.  Mr. Gaines has 
entered a plea of guilty to one count making a false statement to the FBI agent. 
II. 
ARGUMENT AND CITATION TO AUTHORITY 
The presentence investigation report (“PSR”) calculates Mr. Gaines’s Total 
Offense Level as 12. With a Criminal History Category I, this yields a guideline 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 3 of 16

4 
 
sentencing range of 10 to 16 months.  Mr. Gaines asks that the Court impose a 
sentence of probation. 
Between the several grounds for downward departure under the guidelines 
and downward variance pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) that Defendant will 
discuss below, the Court has many avenues to justify a probated sentence.  In this 
memorandum, Defendant will first address the grounds for a downward 
departure and then discuss the grounds for a downward variance. In the end, 
however, the bottom line is that it would be cruel, unnecessary, and unreasonable 
to put this medically fragile, cognitively impaired, and elderly man in prison in 
light of his honorable personal history and the circumstances of this offense.  
A. 
Grounds for a Downward Departure Under the Guidelines 
1. 
Downward departure for age, mental condition, and 
physical condition 
 
Mr. Gaines’s age, mental condition, and medical condition provide a basis 
for both a downward departure under the guidelines and a downward variance 
pursuant to § 3553(a). Under the sentencing guidelines, age “may be relevant in 
determining whether a departure is warranted if considerations based on age, 
individually or in combination with other offender characteristics, are present to 
an unusual degree and distinguish the case from typical cases covered by the 
guidelines.” U.S.S.G § 5H1.1.  The guideline further indicates that age provides a 
ground for a downward departure where the defendant is elderly and infirm and 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 4 of 16

5 
 
where another form of punishment would be less expensive than incarceration. Id.  
The guidelines contain similar downward departure provisions with similar 
language for mental conditions and physical conditions. U.S.S.G. §§ 5H1.3 and 
5H1.4. 
It is hard to imagine a defendant who would be more aptly described by 
these guideline downward departure provisions than Mr. Gaines.  He is elderly, 
disabled, medically fragile, and cognitively impaired.  This rare combination of 
advanced age, serious medical conditions, and cognitive difficulties, puts Mr. 
Gaines far outside the heartland of the typical defendant who comes before the 
Court. 
At 67, Mr. Gaines would be among the oldest inmates in the federal prison 
system if sentenced to a term of imprisonment.  According to the Bureau of 
Prisons, there are only 4,285 federal inmates who are over the age of 65.  This is 
just 2.8 percent of the federal prison population. In the prison context, anyone over 
the age of 50 is considered elderly.1 
                                          
1  
“It is recommended that, in order to have a uniform reference point,  
correctional agencies nationwide adopt age 50 as the chronological starting 
point to define ‘older offenders.’ This is based on a number of factors 
including socioeconomic status, access to medical care, and lifestyle of most 
offenders.” Dr. Joann B. Morton, An Administrative Overview of the Older 
Inmate, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections, 4 
(1992), available at http://static.nicic.gov/Library/010937.pdf . 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 5 of 16

6 
 
   
Federal 
Bureau 
of 
Prisons, 
Inmate 
Statistics, 
Inmate 
Age, 
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_age.jsp (last visited 
September 29, 2021). 
The guidelines note that a downward departure for age, mental condition, 
and physical infirmity would be appropriate in situations where alternatives to 
incarceration are less expensive. The presentence report list the cost of 
incarceration for Mr. Gaines at $44,258 per year.  In 2004, the United States 
Department of Justice’s National Institute of Corrections determined that the cost 
of incarceration for older inmates is between $60,000 and $70,000 per year. See 
National Institute of Corrections, Correctional Health Care: Addressing the Needs of 
Elderly, Chronically Ill, and Terminally Ill Inmates, at 11 (2004).  These cost are likely 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 6 of 16

7 
 
even higher today.  A 2016 report by the Office of Inspector General of the 
Department of Justice found that costs for incarcerating aging inmates (defined as 
those over 50) is substantially higher than costs for younger inmates. Office of 
Inspector General of the Department of Justice, The Impact of an Aging Inmate 
Population 
on 
the 
Federal 
Bureau 
of 
Prisons, 
February 
2016, 
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2015/e1505.pdf (last viewed September 29, 2021).  
The cost for medical care was 10 times higher for older inmates and medication 
expenses was 14 times higher for older inmates.  Id. These higher costs are the 
result of the increased medical needs of this population. Mr. Gaines is already a 
very ill man, as he continues to age, his medical needs will only increase.  The cost 
of probation is only $4,454 per year.  This is a far less costly alternative. 
2. 
Downward departure for aberrant behavior 
Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.20, a downward departure is appropriate 
because the offense conduct constitutes aberrant behavior for Mr. Gaines.  Under 
this policy statement, the court may downwardly depart “if the defendant 
committed a single criminal occurrence or single criminal transaction that (1) was 
committed without significant planning; (2) was of limited duration; and (3) 
represents a marked deviation by the defendant from an otherwise law-abiding 
life.” U.S.S.G, § 5K2.20(b).2  Mr. Gaines satisfies each of these factors.  There was 
                                          
2  
Prohibitions of the application of this policy statement contained in  
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 7 of 16

8 
 
little planning in this offense.  The agent called Mr. Gaines out of the blue, Mr. 
Gaines asked a codefendant how he should answer the agent’s questions, and Mr. 
Gaines did that when the agent called back.  All the conversations took place on 
the same day and Mr. Gaines’s conversations with the agent were brief.  This 
offense is certainly a marked deviation from Mr. Gaines’s law-abiding life.  He is 
a senior citizen with no criminal record.  He served his country honorably in the 
Navy for 21 years and then worked for the Post Office for 14 years.  Clearly, this is 
aberrant behavior that qualifies for a downward departure under § 5K2.20. 
B. 
Grounds for a Downward Variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 
The ultimate command of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) is to impose a sentence that is 
“sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with” the sentencing 
purposes stated in the statute. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). This parsimony provision 
requires district courts to impose the minimum punishment needed to satisfy the 
purposes of sentencing—just punishment, deterrence, protection of the public, 
and rehabilitation of the defendant.  Thus, although § 3553(a) requires the 
sentencing court to consider the applicable guideline range, it is only one of several 
factors, and it is the parsimony provision that serves as “the guidepost for 
                                          
§ 5K2.20(a) and (c) do not have any impact or applicability to Mr. Gaines’s 
situation.  
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 8 of 16

9 
 
sentencing decisions post-Booker.”  United States v. Ferguson, 456 F.3d 660, 667 (6th 
Cir. 2006).3 
Each of the reasons discussed above as grounds for a downward departure 
under the guidelines are also grounds for a downward variance under § 3553(a).  
In fact, because the Court does not have to jump through the hoops required for a 
downward departure, the Court has more freedom to downwardly vary under § 
3553(a).  Defendant will discuss these and other grounds for a downward variance 
within the § 3553(a) framework. 
 
 
 
                                          
3  
Congress has set forth the factors a sentencing court must consider in  
determining a reasonable sentence, which include: 
 
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history 
and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need to reflect the 
seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and 
to provide just punishment for the offense; (3) the need for 
deterrence; (4) the need to protect the public; (5) the need to 
provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational 
training or medical care; (6) the kinds of sentences available; (7) 
the Sentencing Guidelines range; (8) pertinent policy 
statements of the Sentencing Commission; (9) the need to avoid 
unwanted sentencing disparities; and (10) the need to provide 
restitution to victims. 
United States v. Talley, 431 F.3d 784, 786 (11th Cir. 2005) (summarizing 18 
U.S.C. § 3553(a)). 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 9 of 16

10 
 
1. 
Mr. Gaines’s history, medical, mental and physical 
conditions, and circumstances of the offense 
 
As the court considers Mr. Gaines’s history and the circumstances of the 
offense, his age, medical conditions, physical disabilities, and intellectual and 
cognitive deficits all justify a downward variance.  He is so debilitated mentally 
and physically that it is unlikely that he would be able to function in prison.  Such 
a fate would be inhumane for this man who made a false statement to an FBI agent 
about a financial crime when the false statement did nothing to obstruct or impede 
the investigation. 
Mr. Gaines’s age and physical condition should be considered as a ground 
for a variance because prison life is harder and harsher for older inmates.  “Older 
prisoners, even if they are not suffering illness, can find the ordinary rigors of 
prison particularly difficult because of a general decline in physical and often 
mental functioning which affects how they live in their environments and what 
they need to be healthy, safe, and have a sense of wellbeing.” Human Rights 
Watch, Old Behind Bars: The Aging Prison Population in the United States, at 45 
(January 2012).  Ordinary prison life may cause older inmates great difficulty.  For 
example, things like having to climb stairs, walking long distances for meals, 
standing in lines for medication or meals, and sleeping on thin mattresses are all 
part of everyday prison life, but can be extremely challenging for older inmates. 
For someone like Mr. Gaines who is cognitively impaired and suffers from so 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 10 of 16

11 
 
many medical ailments, prison life would be so harsh and difficult that it would 
be outside the realm of reasonable punishment. 
A variance is also appropriate because Mr. Gaines would be extremely 
vulnerable in prison because of his age, cognitive impairments, and physical 
infirmities.  Prisons are filled with men who are much younger and much stronger 
than Mr. Gaines.  Because of his age and poor physical and mental condition, he 
could easily be targeted and victimized by other inmates.  This makes prison a 
much more difficult and dangerous place for Mr. Gaines. The Supreme Court has 
recognized that vulnerability in prison is a valid ground for a downward 
departure. Koon v. United States, 518 U.S. 81 (1996).  Certainly, it is a valid ground 
for the Court to considered under § 3553 
2. 
Recidivism, deterrence, just punishment, and aberrant  
behavior 
 
Mr. Gaines is 67 years old.  Aside from this offense, he has never been in any 
legal trouble.  He has a long and productive work history and a stable family life.  
Mr. Gaines has maintained a spotless record while released on bond in this case 
and satisfied all of the requirements of pretrial supervision.  
Mr. Gaines’s history of good behavior and his post-offense record of good 
conduct demonstrates that the offense was aberrant behavior.  It never would have 
occurred if John Gaines had not taken advantage of Mr. Gaines and lured him into 
Darrell Thomas predatory scheme.  Mr. Gaines’s long history of living a straight 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 11 of 16

12 
 
and narrow life also undermines the need to impose a prison sentence for 
deterrence purposes. Research by the United States Sentencing Commission 
indicates that as age increases, recidivism decreases and that individuals with 
lower criminal history are less likely to recidivate. 
 
United States Sentencing Commission, Report at a Glance: Recidivism and Federal 
Sentencing 
Policy, 
February 
2021,  
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-
publications/backgrounders/rg_recidivism-series.pdf (last visited 9/29/2021). 
At his age and with no criminal history, Mr. Gaines is not a risk of recidivism and 
prison is not necessary to protect the public from him. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(C). 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 12 of 16

13 
 
While certainly recidivism is not an issue with Mr. Gaines, § 3553(a)(2)(B) 
suggests that the Court consider the need to deter others from criminal behavior 
in determining a sentence. The government could argue that a prison sentence 
would send a message to others and prevent them from committing an offense.  
While this argument may have a gut level appeal, substantial social science 
research has consistently shown that while the certainty of being caught and 
punished has a deterrent effect, “increases in severity of punishments do not yield 
significant (if any) marginal deterrent effects.” Michael Tonry, Purposes and 
Functions of Sentencing, 34 Crime & Just. 1, 28 (2006).  In fact, “there is no decisive 
evidence to support the conclusion that harsh sentences actually have a general or 
specific deterrent effect on potential white-collar offenders.” Zvi D. Gabbay, 
Exploring the Limits of the Restorative Justice Paradigm: Restorative Justice and White 
Collar Crime, 8 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 421, 448-449 (2007).  The real deterrent 
effect appears to occur when the criminal sanction is accompanied by informal 
sanctions such as social censure, shame, and loss of respect. Id.   
This prosecution has caused Mr. Gaines to experience tremendous shame.  
He has always lived an honest life and it sickens him to think that this offense will 
cause people to think differently of him. The humiliation that has come as a result 
of being publicly identified as part of this case causes Mr. Gaines genuine pain 
every single day.   
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 13 of 16

14 
 
A sentence of probation is a severe and serious sanction that entails a 
substantial loss of liberty.  This sentence would promote respect for the law and 
provide a just punishment for Mr. Gaines.  18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A). As the 
Supreme Court explained: 
We recognize that custodial sentences are qualitatively more severe 
than probationary sentences of equivalent terms. Offenders on 
probation are nonetheless subject to several standard conditions that 
substantially restrict their liberty. See United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 
112, 119, 122 S.Ct. 587, 151 L.Ed.2d 497 (2001) (“Inherent in the very 
nature of probation is that probationers ‘do not enjoy the absolute 
liberty to which every citizen is entitled’” (quoting Griffin v. Wisconsin, 
483 U.S. 868, 874, 107 S.Ct. 3164, 97 L.Ed.2d 709 (1987); internal 
quotation marks omitted)). Probationers may not leave the judicial 
district, move, or change jobs without notifying, and in some cases 
receiving permission from, their probation officer or the court. They 
must report regularly to their probation officer, permit unannounced 
visits to their homes, refrain from associating with any person 
convicted of a felony, and refrain from excessive drinking. USSG § 
5B1.3. Most probationers are also subject to individual “special 
conditions” imposed by the court. 
 
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 48, 128 S. Ct. 586, 595-96 (2007).   
A sentence is only just and only promotes respect for the law when it is 
proportionate.  A sentence that is too severe for the offense or the individual 
involved undercuts these goals and promotes public distrust for the system. The 
public respects the criminal law only when the punishment fits the crime.  A 
sentence that is too high or too low promotes distrust and disrespect for the law.   
This Court has described §3553(a)(2)(A) as encompassing the concept of 
“just deserts” and indicated that this means that the sentence should “reflect the 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 14 of 16

15 
 
gravity of the defendant’s conduct,” but at the same time “should not be 
unreasonably harsh under the circumstances of the case.” United States v. Pugh, 515 
F.3d 1179, 1195 (11th Cir. 2008) quoting S.Rep. No. 98-225, at 75-76, 1984 
U.S.C.C.A.N. 3182, 3258-59.  Here, probation is a just punishment.  Imprisonment 
is not. 
3. 
The burden of restitution 
Mr. Gaines did not spend any of the money that came from the PPP loan.  
The money was all deposited into his business account and most of it was pulled 
out by John Gaines and Darrell Thomas.  The money that remained in Mr. Gaines’s 
business account was seized by the Government at the time of his arrest.  The chart 
shows where all of the money from the PPP loan ended up. 
 
 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 15 of 16

16 
 
 Despite spending none of the money, Mr. Gaines has agreed to $806,000 in 
restitution – the entire amount of the loan. What this means is that for the rest of 
his life, Mr. Gaines will be hounded by the Government to pay back an amount of 
money that went through his account, but that he never actually spent or used. 
This burdensome financial penalty is one more punishment that Mr. Gaines will 
have to suffer and one more reason that sending him to prison is unnecessary.  
III. 
CONCLUSION 
 
WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth herein, Mr. Gaines respectfully 
requests that the court impose a sentence of probation. 
  
Dated:  This 29th day of September, 2021.  
 
 
 
 
 
Respectfully Submitted, 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Brian Mendelsohn 
 
 
 
 
 
Brian Mendelsohn 
 
 
 
 
 
Georgia Bar No. 502031 
 
 
 
 
 
Attorney for Andre Lee Gaines 
Federal Defender Program, Inc. 
Centennial Tower, Suite 1500 
101 Marietta Street, N.W. 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 
(404) 688-7530; Fax: (404) 688-0768 
Brian_Mendelsohn@fd.org 
 
Case 1:21-cr-00206-JPB     Document 10     Filed 09/29/21     Page 16 of 16

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.gand.291524.10.0.pdf
Size
360,437 bytes
SHA-256
7cc0bffdcf3943146ef4425589336390ee41805b0f1489ed5a39b9f635899615
Our copy
gov.uscourts.gand.291524.10.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top