Home/Source documents/Court filing — United States v. Farah (Dkt. 687, D. Minn.)
Court filing — United States v. Farah (Dkt. 687, D. Minn.)
Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 687 Filed 10/14/24 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Criminal No. CR 22-124(2) (NEB)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE
) GOVERNMENT’S POSITION
Mohamed Jama Ismail, ) REGARDING SENTENCING
)
Defendant. )
The Defendant, by and through his attorney, Patrick L. Cotter, and pursuant to,
respectfully submits the following response to the government’s position regarding
sentencing in this matter Doc. 686 and 674.
I. The Court May Find That His Conviction for Obtaining a Passport by False
Statement Conviction is Relevant Conduct Without Making a Finding that
An Obstruction of Justice Enhancement Applies.
In response to the Government’s argument pg. 13 paragraph IV., Mr. Ismail moves
that the Court may find that his Obtaining a Passport by False Statement conviction is
relevant conduct, not counted for criminal history points while also not applying an
Obstruction of Justice enhancement. Conduct underlying a sentence imposed after a
defendant commenced the instant offense may be considered relevant conduct to the instant
offense if it otherwise qualifies under section §1B1.3(a)(2). USSG §4A1.2 comment (n. 1).
If the Court makes this finding the sentence for relevant conduct does not accrue criminal
history points. Id. If the conduct does not accrue criminal history points than the two-level
reduction as a zero-point offender still applies. There is no dispute that Mr. Ismail’s
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 687 Filed 10/14/24 Page 2 of 3
passport was seized as part of the investigation into the offense conduct his is being
sentenced. There is no dispute the offense conduct happened after Ismail commenced the
conduct for which he is being sentenced. There is no dispute he pled guilty, accepted
responsibility for that conduct and served his sentence. The relevant conduct of lying to
get the passport that was seized as part of this investigation does not require a finding that
Ismail intended to flee potential prosecution for yet uncharged crimes at the time vs. his
intention to see his family. Simply put one finding of “relevant conduct” does not
absolutely require another finding of “obstruction of justice.”
Certainly, it is not Ismail’s intention to increase his criminal history score nor lose
his zero-point offender status. Should the Court reject Mr. Ismail’s position than he would
not persist on the objection to the Obstruction of Justice Enhancement.
II. The Government Allegation that Mr. Ismail will Leave Prison a Rich Man
is Fanciful.
First, Mr. Ismail has disclosed any potential assets he has, and he did so long before
preparation for sentencing. Second, his bank and investment accounts have either been
seized by the Government or closed. Third, his family’s home is subject to a preliminary
forfeiture Order issued by this Court. Fourth, the Government knows that Mr. Ismail will
be required to cooperate with probation and the Government regarding collection of
restitution and forfeiture of assets as part of the Court’s sentence. The government’s
argument he will be a “rich man” is tailored to inflaming passion rather than addressing
any of the appropriate sentencing factors. Finally, the alleged 2 items of real estate assets
in Africa currently have no legal protections, as far as Mr. Ismail knows, and are subject to
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 687 Filed 10/14/24 Page 3 of 3
arbitrary and capricious confiscation or repurposing by others in Kenya. Mr. Ismail has
not legal ability to claim ownership and the likelihood he will regain ownership upon his
release from prison in the United States is fanciful. The governments line of argument in
this regard does not further any recognized sentencing objective.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: October 14, 2024 /s/ Patrick L. Cotter
Patrick L. Cotter
Attorney No. 0319120
Attorney for Defendant
105 Hardman Court, Suite 110
South St. Paul, MN 55075
Phone: 651-455-1555
Fax: 651-455-9055
patrick@siebencotterlaw.com
3