Sentencing Memorandum and Request for Variance — United States v. Goode-McCoy (Dkt. 24, D. Nev.)

Summary

A defense sentencing memorandum and request for variance in United States of America v. Candies Goode-McCoy, No. 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, filed March 20, 2026 by attorneys Jason M. Silver and Ric D. Hulshoff of Silver Law PLC. It states that Goode-McCoy pleaded guilty to one count of the Information charging conspiracy to defraud the government with respect to claims under Title 18, United States Code §286, a Class C felony. The memorandum describes the conviction as an aberration in an otherwise mostly law-abiding life, states that she takes full responsibility, and asks the Court to impose a non-custodial sentence of probation based on her history and characteristics.

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

Record facts

Full text

Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK       Document 24      Filed 03/20/26     Page 1 of 6




 1    Jason M. Silver (AZ Bar No. 016756) (Pro Hac Vice)
      jsilver@silverlawplc.com
 2    Ric D. Hulshoff (NV Bar No. 16410)
 3    ric@silverlawplc.com
      SILVER LAW PLC
 4    7033 E. Greenway Parkway Suite 200
 5    Scottsdale, Arizona 85254
      Telephone: (480) 429-3360
 6    Facsimile: (480) 429-3362
 7
      Attorneys for Defendant
 8
                                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 9
10                                     DISTRICT OF NEVADA
11
      United States of America,                   ) No. 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK
12                                                )
                    Plaintiff,                    ) SENTENCING MEMORANDUM AND
13
                                                  ) REQUEST FOR VARIANCE
14    v.                                          )
                                                  )
15
      CANDIES GOODE-MCCOY,                        )
16    aka “Candies King Elliott,”                 )
      aka “Candies Ecola Smith,”                  )
17
                                                  )
18                  Defendant.
19
                                      I.     Preliminary Statement
20
              CANDIES GOODE-MCCOY (“Candies”) pleaded guilty to one count of the
21
      Information charging her with violation of Title 18, United States Code §286, a Class C
22
      felony offense, for conspiracy to defraud the government with respect to claims. This
23
      conviction of Candies represents a marked aberration in an otherwise mostly law-abiding
24
      life.
25
              Candies takes full responsibility for her conduct and understands that she must
26
      now face the consequences of her actions. In determining the appropriate sentence, the
27
      Court should consider her individual history and characteristics.
28

     Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK          Document 24    Filed 03/20/26    Page 2 of 6




 1           There are many factors justifying a non-custodial sentence of probation, including:
 2       • Soon after the government completed its investigation, undersigned Counsel
 3           negotiated a Plea Agreement with the government and saved the government
 4           tremendous prosecution resources.
 5       • Candies not only accepts responsibility for her conduct, but she is also very
 6           remorseful and embarrassed. Candies is currently employed as a driver and is the
 7           ONLY caregiver for four very young children, Lyrik, Jayce, Princess and Marie,
 8           ages 6, 3, 2 and 2 years old, respectively. Candies is not currently involved with
 9           any tax preparation business and will not be in the future. As such, Candies is in
10           no position to re-offend.
11           This has been an impact case in Nevada and throughout the United States, and a
12    prison sentence is not necessary in order to achieve the objectives articulated in 18 U.S.C.
13    §3553(a)(2). A strong message to the community has already been sent and it has been
14    received loud and clear. The goals of both general and specific deterrence have been
15    achieved, and do not require a prison sentence. Probation recommends five years of
16    incarceration followed by three years of supervised release, with no fine and a special
17    assessment of $100, in addition to restitution of $26,922,188.75. Candies agrees with
18    Probation’s recommendation, except for incarceration.
19           On June 5, 2025, the United States Courts stated that for people involved in non-
20    violent criminal cases, supervision not only presents a second chance at a productive life
21    but saves taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars compared to costs associated with
22    incarceration, according to figures compiled by the Administrative Office of the U.S.
23    Courts. The Public Costs of Supervision Versus Detention. Candies requests a second
24    chance for not only herself, but so that she can be there for her 4 young children.
25                       II.    Candies’ Personal Background and Character
26           A. Personal History
27           The Presentence Report accurately lays out Candies personal and family data,
28    physical condition, mental and emotional health, substance abuse, educational, vocational



                                                  -2-

     Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK         Document 24       Filed 03/20/26    Page 3 of 6




 1    and special skills, employment record, military, assets, liabilities and monthly
 2    income/expenses and ability to pay (PSR pars. 47 through 82, inclusive) and as such, I
 3    will not reiterate such.
 4                                      III.   The Offense Conduct
 5             Candies accepts full responsibility for her conduct. She knows that her conduct
 6    was wrong and illegal, and she understands that she must now face the consequences of
 7    her actions. No matter what the sentence is, Candies will be a convicted felon.
 8                               IV.   The Advisory Guidelines Calculation
 9             The plea agreement between the United States and Candies stipulates that the base
10    offense level for the violation of 18 U.S.C. §286 of U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 is 6. The specific
11    offense characteristics for loss is an additional 24 levels. The Probation Officer has
12    added an additional 4 levels for role in the offense, which Defendant disagrees with such
13    as stated in the Probation Officer’s report at page 29, i.e., it should only be 2 levels as the
14    parties Stipulated to in the Plea Agreement at par. 13. The plea agreement also provides
15    that due to the acceptance of responsibility of Candies, she is entitled to a total of 3 levels
16    of departure under U.S.S.G. §3E1.1.
17             Candies’ guideline calculation should be a base offense level of 32, minus 3 levels
18    for acceptance of responsibility, which equals 29, which carries an advisory sentencing
19    range of 87 to 108 months.
20
          V.       A Non-Guidelines Sentence of Probation Is Appropriate Under 18 U.S.C.
21                                               § 3553(A)
22             The court must carefully consider all the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a),
23    including “the history and characteristics of the defendant,” and “impose a sentence
24    sufficient, but not greater than necessary.” 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(1), (2)(A); see id.
25             Additional factors from 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) to be considered include the need for
26    the sentence to “provide just punishment for the offense;” to adequately deter criminal
27    conduct and protect the public from further crimes of the defendant. 18 U.S.C.
28



                                                    -3-

     Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK          Document 24       Filed 03/20/26   Page 4 of 6




 1    §3553(a)(2)(A)-(C). Pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission
 2    should also be considered. 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(5).
 3              As demonstrated by an application of these factors, a Guidelines sentence in this
 4    case would be unreasonable and “greater than necessary” to satisfy the sentencing goals
 5    articulated in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(2).
 6    Unique Facts and Circumstances that Warrant a Variance From the Guidelines
 7                          1.       Impact Already Suffered
 8              Candies’ plea of guilty has been spread throughout the Nevada and the United
 9    States.
10              In United States v. Anderson, 533 F.3d 623, 633-34 (8th Cir. 2008), the court
11    found a sentence “reasonable, appropriate and just” following a downward departure.
12    The court noted as one factor the “atypical punishment” the defendant had suffered,
13    including “loss of his reputation and his company, the ongoing case against him from the
14    Securities and Exchange Commission and the harm visited upon him as a result of the
15    fact that his actions brought his wife and friend into the criminal justice system.” Id.
16                          2.       Loss of Support for Candies’ Children
17              Although the family ties and responsibilities are not normally a grounds for a
18    departure, under U.S.S.G. §5H1.6 (Policy Statement), commentary 1(B) “[a] departure
19    under this policy statement based on the loss of caretaking or financial support of the
20    defendant’s family requires, in addition to the court’s consideration of the non-exhaustive
21    list of circumstances in subdivision (A), the presence of the following circumstances: (i)
22    the defendant’s service of a sentence within the applicable guideline range will cause
23    substantial, direct, and specific loss of essential caretaking, or essential financial support,
24    to the defendant’s family. * * *.”
25              At stated in more detail in the PSR, at paragraphs 59 through 63, inclusive,
26    Candies has 4 children under the age of 7, all of which she is solely responsible for their
27    care. Each of the children’s fathers are not part of their life and they provide no
28    emotional, financial or other support to these children. If Candies is incarcerated, she has


                                                     -4-

     Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK        Document 24       Filed 03/20/26   Page 5 of 6




 1    NO family or friends that can care for her 4 children while she is incarcerated and such
 2    children will become a ward of the state and put into the state system, which will most
 3    likely be extremely detrimental to the children. If Candies is incarcerated, her 4 children
 4    will effectively be incarcerated with Candies and will greatly suffer due to her actions.
 5    The U.S. Courts have found that for defendants like Candies, incarceration is not
 6    necessary from a cost and other stand point and Candies can live a productive life caring
 7    for her 4 very young children.
 8                       3.       Contrition, Acceptance of Responsibility and Collateral
                                  Consequences
 9
             Candies has also accepted responsibility for her actions and pleaded guilty.
10
      Moreover, she has expressed extreme remorse to her friends and family. Candies’
11
      contrition and remorse are factors to be considered as a basis for a downward variance
12
      under 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). United States v. Howe, 543 F.3d 128, 138 (3d Cir. 2008). In
13
      Howe, the district court found that the defendant “recognize[d] the serious nature of [his]
14
      offense and [was] truly remorseful,” sentencing him to probation and home confinement
15
      despite a Guidelines range of 18 to 24 months’ imprisonment. Id. at 132-34. On appeal,
16
      the Third Circuit affirmed, holding that the defendant’s “remorse at sentencing [was] a
17
      factor that [could] distinguish him from the universe of [other] white-collar offenders.”
18
      Id. at 138.
19
             Courts have similarly granted downward variances when the defendant has
20
      suffered collateral consequences as a result of his conviction. See, e.g., United States v.
21
      Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 470, 474-75 (4th Cir. 2007) (holding that consideration of
22
      collateral consequences of conviction is “consistent with §3553(a)’s directive that the
23
      sentence reflect the need for ‘just punishment’ and ‘adequate deterrence’”). A non-
24
      custodial sentence is therefore more than sufficient to specifically deter any future
25
      criminal conduct by Candies and is also sufficient to generally deter similar conduct by
26
      other would-be offenders. See United States v. Coughlin, No. 06-200005, 2008 WL
27
      313099, at *5-6 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 1, 2008) (holding that home confinement and probation
28



                                                   -5-

     Case 2:25-cr-00006-JAD-NJK       Document 24         Filed 03/20/26   Page 6 of 6




 1    are capable of deterring white collar criminals “who cherish their freedom of movement
 2    and right of privacy”).
 3              B. A Sentence of Probation Is Sufficient to Achieve the Goals of
 4                 Sentencing
 5           The factors in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) weigh strongly in favor of a non-custodial
 6    sentence in this case. Based on his unique history and characteristics, Candies
 7    respectfully requests that the Court impose a sentence of probation, a special assessment
 8    of $100, and restitution of $26,922,188.75.
 9
10                                          VI.     Conclusion
11           For the foregoing reasons, Candies respectfully requests that the court impose a

12    sentence of probation, a special assessment of $100, no fine and restitution of

13    $26,922,188.75.

14           RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED on this 20th day of March 2026.
15                                                SILVER LAW PLC
16                                                By:     s:/ Jason M. Silver
17                                                   Attorney for Defendant
18    COPY of the foregoing transmitted
19    by ECF for filing this 20th day of March 2026,
      to:
20    Clerk’s Office
21    United States District Court

22    John Gerardi
23    John.gerardi2@usdoj.gov
      Department of Justice
24    Attorneys for Plaintiff
25
      Jordyn Pickrom, Probation Officer
26    U.S. Probation Office
27     jordan_pickrom@nvp.uscourts.gov

28    /s/    L. Montero



                                                    -6-

File and source

File

24.pdf

Size

214,707 bytes

SHA-256

e0432b5fa59ba2de945c58dd7d88d378c168bce417f5d82ed20bc17df4465720

Our copy

24.pdf