Sentencing Memorandum by Shawn Michael Simmerer — USA v. Simmerer et al (Dkt. 294, M.D. Fla.)
Summary
This is Defendant Shawn Michael Simmerer's Sentencing Memorandum and Request for a Downward Variance, Document 294 in Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN, United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division. It states that, despite his conviction after trial, Mr. Simmerer presents positive attributes, and it asks the Court to grant a downward variance. Its mitigating factors are headed Unstable Childhood, Caregiving Responsibilities, Mental And Physical Health And Substance Abuse History, and Conduct While On Pretrial Services Supervision. The conclusion asks the Court to impose a sentence that is "sufficient, but not greater than necessary," to permit self-surrender to his designated BOP facility, and to recommend a BOP facility that can accommodate his current prescription regimen.
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
Cite this document
“Sentencing Memorandum by Shawn Michael Simmerer — USA v. Simmerer et al (Dkt. 294, M.D. Fla.).”
Original at ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/sentencing-memorandum-by-shawn-michael-simmerer-usa-v-simmerer-et-al-d-d97666e720/
, SHA-256 9e65fd9e68b377d2fe93431e7ae701f737753bacdf4288c893889879af61d0e4.Full text
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 1 of 23 PageID
3369
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN
)
SHAWN MICHAEL SIMMERER, )
)
Defendant. )
)
DEFENDANT SHAWN MICHAEL SIMMERER’S SENTENCING
MEMORANDUM AND REQUEST FOR A DOWNWARD VARIANCE
I. INTRODUCTION
Despite his conviction after trial, the defendant, Shawn Michael Simmerer
(“Mr. Simmerer”), presents many positive attributes, which demonstrate that he
is fully capable of rehabilitation and redemption as he moves into the second half
of his life. As set forth herein, Mr. Simmerer respectfully requests that the Court
do its best to recognize these positive characteristics and extend him mercy by
granting a downward variance at sentencing. He further requests that the Court
give him the opportunity to self-report to his designated federal prison facility.
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 2 of 23 PageID
3370
II. MITIGATING FACTORS THAT JUSTIFY A DOWNWARD
VARIANCE
Pursuant to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 245-67 (2005), a sentencing
court is now unencumbered in its ability “to 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 and the punishment to ensue.”
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 53 (2007) (quoting Koon v. United States, 518 U.S.
81 (1996)).
In order to satisfy § 3553(a), and ensure “that the punishment will suit not
merely the offense but the individual defendant[,]” this Court is free to consider
“the widest possible breadth of information about” Mr. Simmerer. Pepper v. United
States, 562 U.S. 476, 488 (2011); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3661. The Guidelines are
"effectively advisory" and constitute only "one factor among several [that] courts
must consider in determining an appropriate sentence." Kimbrough v. United
States, 552 U.S. 85, 90 (2007) (quotation marks removed). Stated differently, a
district court is "not bound" by the Guidelines including their provisions (repealed
in 2025) addressing when departures from the otherwise-applicable Guidelines
range are appropriate. See United States v. Strother, No. 24-4291, 2026 U.S. App.
LEXIS 190, at *5, n. 1 (4th Cir. Jan. 6, 2026) (citing Booker and U.S.S.G. Ch. 1, Pt. A;
U.S.S.G. App. C, amend. 836).
2
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 3 of 23 PageID
3371
Addressed below are several mitigating factors that Mr. Simmerer asks the
Court to consider.
A. Unstable Childhood
Mr. Simmerer was born in 1976 in Miami, Florida. Doc. 290, ¶ 61. His
parents separated when he was just two years old and he and his mother moved
around a lot when he was growing up. Id. at ¶ 61, 63. His biological father
struggled with alcoholism and did not achieve sobriety until Mr. Simmerer
reached adulthood. Id. at ¶ 63. When he was seven years old, his mother married
a man who physically abused her in front of Mr. Simmerer. Id. More damaging
than witnessing his mother’s abuse, his step-father exposed Mr. Simmerer to a
step-grandfather who, with another male partner, sexually molested the
defendant. Id. at ¶ 64. Tragically, Mr. Simmerer’s mother failed to report the abuse
to law enforcement, despite assuring the defendant that she would do so. Id.
Eventually, Mr. Simmerer’s mother divorced his step-father and moved
with the defendant to his grandmother’s house for a short period of time before
moving yet again. Id. at ¶ 63. It is clear that Mr. Simmerer lacked guidance and
stability in his childhood, in addition to the abuse he witnessed and experienced.
In the undersigned’s view, his mother did not prioritize him and was more
concerned with her relationships and physical appearance than raising the
defendant properly.
3
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 4 of 23 PageID
3372
Unsurprisingly, Mr. Simmerer struggled in school. He attended “learning
development classes” starting in the fifth grade. Id. at ¶ 81. He was held back a
grade in middle school and struggled with bullying due to his weight. Id. Later,
he dropped out of high school in the tenth grade. Id. He was eventually permitted
to have a liposuction procedure at just 18 years old, which indicates how
dissatisfied he was with his physical appearance at a young age. Id. at ¶ 68.
In sum, Mr. Simmerer’s unstable and difficult childhood should serve as
mitigating factors at the sentencing. “Pre-Booker, ‘[l]ack of guidance as a youth
and similar circumstances indicating a disadvantaged upbringing’ were not
considered relevant grounds for downward departure . . . . [p]ost-Booker, however,
[a Defendant’s] childhood and lack of education are relevant under § 3553(a)(1)
with regard to Defendant’s ‘history and characteristics.’” United States v. Mapp,
No. 05-80494, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9381, 2007 WL 485513, at *14-15 (E.D. Mich.
Feb. 9, 2007). In fact, courts have stated that an “unusually disadvantaged
childhood” is a potential mitigating circumstance. See Spears v. United States, 555
U.S. 261, 263 (2009); United States v. Burney, 992 F.3d 398, 400 (5th Cir. 2021).
B. Caregiving Responsibilities
Despite her shortcomings when he was a child, Mr. Simmerer remains
deeply loyal to his mother. The defendant and his mother are financially destitute.
Since July of 2025, they have been living with extended family in Winter Haven,
4
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 5 of 23 PageID
3373
Florida, where they share a single bedroom and bathroom. Doc. 290, ¶ 66. His
mother is disabled and has been hospitalized multiple times within the last few
years. Id. at ¶ 60. She has had numerous surgeries for neck and spine issues,
including a fusion procedure. Id. As a result, Mr. Simmerer’s mother has difficulty
ambulating without his assistance. Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a photograph
of Mr. Simmerer’s mother from one of her recent hospitalizations in December of
2025. Later, in February of 2026, she was hospitalized again and diagnosed with
heart failure. Attached hereto as Exhibit O is a page from her clinical notes from
her February 2026 hospitalization. Mr. Simmerer serves as his mother’s sole
caretaker and he is terrified about what will happen to her while he is incarcerated.
During the pre-Booker era, courts have always considered a defendant’s
unique or extraordinary family circumstances as a potential basis for a sentence
below the guidelines. See e.g. U.S.S.G. § 5H1.6 (repealed on November 1, 2025);
United States v. Norton, 218 F. Supp. 2d 1014, 1019 (E.D. Wis. 2002); United States v.
Owens, 145 F.3d 923, 926 (7th Cir. 1998). Downward departures based on family
responsibilities were premised on the notion that “[t]he United States Sentencing
Guidelines do not require a judge to leave compassion and common sense at the
door to the courtroom.” Norton, 218 F. Supp. 2d at 1016 (internal citation omitted).
In the post-Booker era, where a sentencing judge has the ability to vary from
the guidelines without even finding a basis to depart, district courts have routinely
5
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 6 of 23 PageID
3374
imposed below-guidelines sentences where a defendant’s family will be
significantly impacted by the defendant’s incarceration. See e.g. United States v.
Husein, 478 F.3d 318, 326 (6th Cir. 2007) (affirming a downward departure from a
guidelines range of 40 months imprisonment to a sentence of one day in prison
and 270 days home confinement under § 5H1.6; where the defendant lived with
and supported her family, cared for her seriously ill father and was irreplaceable
and because “[j]ailing [the defendant] not only would have forced her mother to
remain at home, but would have put the entire family on welfare”); United States
v. Baker, 502 F.3d 465, 468 (6th Cir. 2007) (affirming a downward variance that was
based on the defendant’s family responsibilities, including caring for a son who
had received a heart transplant years earlier); see also United States v. Ordonez, No.
8:18-cr-427-WFJ-AEP, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108498, * (M.D. Fla. June 9, 2025) (Jung,
J.) (district court granted “a significant, three-level downward variance [but still
imposed a sentence more than what defendant was seeking]. . . based on the
Defendant's remorse, family ties and responsibilities in Colombia, and other
considerations . . .”). Here, the Probation Office has identified Mr. Simmerer’s
family ties and responsibilities as a factor that could warrant a sentence below his
advisory guideline range. Doc. 290, ¶ 111. Based on the foregoing, he asks the
Court to strongly consider this mitigating factor at sentencing.
6
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 7 of 23 PageID
3375
C. Mental And Physical Health And Substance Abuse History
Mr. Simmerer has been formally diagnosed with “acute stress disorder,
panic disorder, generalized anxiety, and major depressive disorder.” Id. at ¶ 77.
He is currently receiving treatment for these conditions. Id. Mr. Simmerer is also
taking a number of medications to address his mental health conditions. Id. at ¶¶
72-73.
Mr. Simmerer started experimenting with alcohol and controlled substances
in his teenage years. Id. at ¶ 78. Like many Americans in the last two decades, Mr.
Simmerer developed an opioid addiction after he started taking Oxycontin
pursuant to a medical prescription for pain. In the 1990s, Mr. Simmerer was
involved in two separate motor vehicle accidents. Id. at ¶ 69. Since then, he has
struggled with physical pain. In 1999, he received his first oxycontin prescription.
Id. at ¶ 78. He quickly developed a dependence on the powerful drug, which he
continued to abuse through 2004. During this period of his life, Mr. Simmerer’s
thinking and judgment were severely compromised due to his addiction. See
United States v. Hendrickson, 25 F. Supp. 3d 1166, 1174 (N.D. Iowa 2014) (“By
physically hijacking the brain, addiction diminishes the addict's capacity to
evaluate and control his or her behaviors. Rather than rationally assessing the
costs of their actions, addicts are prone to act impulsively, without accurately
weighing future consequences.”). It was during this same time frame that Mr.
7
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 8 of 23 PageID
3376
Simmerer engaged in the most significant offenses in his criminal history. Doc.
290, ¶¶ 49-53.
Thankfully, in 2004, Mr. Simmerer entered a substance abuse program and
went through a “rapid detox.” Id. at ¶ 79. More recently, Mr. Simmerer has
lawfully used marijuana for his pain management. He had a medical marijuana
card prior to his arrest in this case. Id. at ¶ 78. However, after his first drug screen
by Pretrial Services where he tested positive for marijuana, he has consistently
tested negative for controlled substances. Id. at ¶ 80.
Mr. Simmerer has reported being in poor health. He was hospitalized twice
in the last two years with symptoms that were consistent with a transient ischemic
attack (“TIA”). Id. at ¶¶ 71, 75. One of these hospitalizations occurred during his
trial. A CT scan and laboratory tests during this hospitalization cleared him of a
stroke but Mr. Simmerer was also given discharge instructions for a TIA. Id.
Attached hereto as Exhibit A are these discharge instructions. This month, Mr.
Simmerer was hospitalized again at Winter Haven Hospital. Attached hereto as
Exhibit B are medical documents from this most recent hospitalization. According
to these records, Mr. Simmerer was admitted on June 3, 2026 under an “emergency
medical condition” related to chest pains, shortness of breath, and bilateral leg
swelling. Exhibit B at 19. During this hospitalization, his blood work
demonstrated some abnormal levels in certain testing categories. Id. at 24-28.
8
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 9 of 23 PageID
3377
After receiving treatment at the hospital, Mr. Simmerer was discharged with a
diagnosis of a “panic attack.” Id. at 21. However, Mr. Simmerer has reported to
the undersigned that he continues to feel pain and does not believe his symptoms
are improving. He is scheduled to see his primary care physician tomorrow, June
10, 2026, for a follow-up visit and testing because his Troponin levels are high.
Debra Franzen, Mr. Simmerer’s psychiatric nurse practitioner, has provided
a letter, a copy of which was submitted to the Probation Office, concerning the
current prescription regimen the defendant is receiving to address his mental
health conditions. Doc. 290, p. 40, ¶ 73. Mr. Simmerer has also received a copy of
the same letter, which was endorsed by his treating physician, Dr. Denise Barnard,
and is attached hereto as Exhibit C. According to this letter, Mr. Simmerer takes
the following medications: Diazepam 10 mg four times daily and Hydroxyzine
HCI 25 mg four times daily. Exhibit C, Doc. 290, p. 40, ¶ 73. Additionally, Mr.
Simmerer has documented allergies and/or intolerances to pharmacologic
alternatives to these medicines, specifically SSRIs and SNRIs. Id. The current
combination of prescriptions has “demonstrated long-term efficacy and
tolerability with no adverse side effects or misuse.” Id. Additionally, his treating
psychiatric team believe that the abrupt discontinuation or change in Mr.
Simmerer’s medication regimen “presents serious and potentially life-threatening
medical risk, including acute withdrawal seizures, severe autonomic instability,
9
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 10 of 23 PageID
3378
cardiac irregularities, and respiratory distress.” Id. Based on the foregoing, his
treating psychiatric professional opined that “uninterrupted continuation of this
regimen is medically necessary to preserve Mr. Simmerer’s health and safety.” Id.
The pharmacy instructions that Mr. Simmerer received with regard to his current
medication regimen echoes the medical opinion of his treating psychiatric team.
Attached hereto as Exhibit D are the personal prescription instructions that Mr.
Simmerer received from his pharmacy, which state that immediate cessation of
taking his prescriptions “can be life-threatening.” Exhibit D.
Mr. Simmer is concerned that if he is detained at a local jail prior to being
transferred to his designated Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) facility, he will not receive
his specific medications and will experience serious medical side effects from the
immediate discontinuation of these prescriptions. Accordingly, he requests that
the Court permit him to self-surrender to his designated BOP facility.
Additionally, this Court is well-versed in the BOP’s inability to provide adequate
medical care in certain contexts. Mr. Simmerer reported that during his last period
of incarceration with the BOP he experienced “seizures and panic attacks.” Doc.
290, ¶ 70. Based on Mr. Simmerer’s poor health and his complicated medical
history, he asks the Court to consider the quality of medical care (or lack thereof)
that he will receive during his incarceration as yet another mitigating factor at
sentencing.
10
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 11 of 23 PageID
3379
D. Conduct While On Pretrial Services Supervision
Additionally, this Court should consider Mr. Simmerer “as he stands before
the court on the day of sentencing.” Pepper, 562 U.S. at 492 (internal citation
omitted). Since his arrest in March of 2024, Mr. Simmerer has avoided any new
law violations and has fully complied with his pretrial release conditions. Doc.
290,¶ 11. Thus, for over two years, he has followed the rules and avoided trouble.
His conduct while on pretrial supervision further supports his request for a
downward variance. See e.g. United States v. Baker, 502 F.3d 465 (6th Cir. 2007)
(where defendant pled guilty to possession of unregistered firearms arising from
an altercation with his wife during which a gun was accidentally discharged and
the guideline range was 27-33 months; a below-guideline sentence of probation
with one year house arrest was found to be proper based in part because the
defendant behaved “exceedingly well” while under the supervision of pretrial
services); United States v. Munoz-Nava, 524 F.3d 1137 (10th Cir. 2008) (in a drug case
where the guideline range was 47 to 56 months, the district court’s sentence of one
year and a day in prison and one year of home detention was found to be
reasonable, in part, because of defendant’s “behavior while on a year-and-a-half
pretrial release, which the district court found to be exemplary” evidence that the
defendant was unlikely to reoffend).
11
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 12 of 23 PageID
3380
E. Mitigating Factors Present In the Nature And Circumstances Of The
Offense
Mr. Simmerer’s offenses are serious. At trial, the jury returned guilty
verdicts finding that he committed PPP loan fraud, a crime that unfortunately
many Americans fell prey to during the COVID-19 pandemic.1 However, there
are some unique distinguishing factors that are mitigating in Mr. Simmerer’s case.
Unlike some defendants, the trial evidence did not indicate that he immediately
took the PPP loan funds and purchased luxury items like a sports car, boat, or
jewelry. Based on the trial evidence, it is clear that part of what motivated him
was his dream of making Your 10 Life Foundation, the leadership training
company he founded, into a success. Notably, this business was formed and had
been in operation before the pandemic. Unfortunately, Mr. Simmerer’s grasp was
well beyond his reach. He made the poor decision of hiring employees and
promising them salaries. This was not a realistic goal given the scale and operation
of Your 10 Life Foundation. When COVID-19 hit, the ability of the foundation to
operate was severely compromised and some of the PPP loans that were
unlawfully sought were used to pay salaries to employees of the company,
including Mr. Simmerer and his co-defendant. The trial evidence indicated that
1 Mr. Simmerer’s post-verdict motions, including a motion for a judgment of
acquittal and a motion for a new trial remain pending. Docs. 243, 244. Therefore,
any statements made herein concerning the offense conduct should not be
construed as any form of admission on Mr. Simmerer’s part.
12
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 13 of 23 PageID
3381
Your 10 Life Foundation had no payroll and that no employees had received actual
salaries prior to the PPP loans. However, Mr. Simmerer and his co-defendant
were not the sole beneficiaries of the fraud in this case. Other individuals,
including several of the government’s witnesses at trial, also profited from the PPP
loans.
Additionally, Mr. Simmerer’s intended loss figure overstates the
seriousness of his offense, especially in light of the fact that the actual loss is
$344,300, which is significantly less than the guidelines loss figure that is being
used to determine his advisory imprisonment range. Doc. 290, ¶¶ 9, 28, 35. This
serves as yet another reason for the Court to grant a downward variance. See
United States v. Johnston, 620 F. App'x 839, 857 (11th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (internal
citations omitted) (“. . . in cases in which the loss calculation substantially
overstates the seriousness of the offense, a downward departure may be
warranted.”); United States v. Rosen, 726 F.3d 1017, 1027 (7th Cir. 2013) (internal
citations omitted) ("a court can consider the amount of variance between the
intended loss and the realistic possibility of loss when considering an appropriate
sentence.").
F. The Lack Of Empirical Evidence Linking Incarceration With
Deterrence
Empirical data undermines any link between lengthy imprisonment and
greater deterrence of white-collar crimes. See, e.g., United States v. Adelson, 441 F.
13
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 14 of 23 PageID
3382
Supp. 2d 506, 514 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (“[T]here is a considerable evidence that even
relatively short sentences can have a strong deterrent effect on prospective ‘white
collar’ offenders.”); U.S. Sent’g Comm’n, Measuring Recidivism: The Criminal
History Computation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (May 2004), available at
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-
publications/2004/200405_Recidivism_Criminal_History.pdf (last visited June 9, 2026)
(research study concluding that fraud had the lowest rearrest rate for recidivism
offenders when compared with firearms offenses, robbery, immigration, drug
trafficking, larceny, and others); Lucian E. Dervan, White Collar Overcriminalization:
Deterrence, Plea Bargaining, and the Loss of Innocence, 101 KY. L.J. 723, 740–41 (2012–
13) (arguing that the length of a carceral sentence is irrelevant to deterrence of
white-collar offenders). Further, the Department of Justice previously agreed that
overly incarcerating defendants is not an effective means of deterrence. See U.S.
Dept. of Justice, Nat’l Inst. of Justice, Five Things About Deterrence (May 2016),
available at https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247350.pdf (last visited June 9,
2026) (finding that “the data show long prison sentences do little to deter” and
stating that “police deter crime by increasing the perception that criminals will be
caught and punished”). Thus, the risk of indictment and conviction itself has a
significant and adequate deterrent effect. See Daniel S. Nagin & Greg Pogarsky,
Integrating Celerity, Impulsivity, and Extralegal Sanction Threats into a Model of General
14
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 15 of 23 PageID
3383
Deterrence: Theory and Evidence, 39 CRIMINOLOGY 865, 865 (2001) (certainty of
apprehension and punishment generally, and not certainty of imprisonment, is
what reduces crime).
Similarly, the empirical evidence does not establish a correlation between
sentence length and specific deterrence. See National Institute of Corrections,
Myths and Facts, Why Incarceration is Not the Best Way to Keep Communities Safe
(2016), attached hereto as Exhibit E. On the other hand, “[a]n overly harsh sentence
may prove counterproductive, increasing a defendant's likelihood to recidivate.”
United States v. Simons, 375 F. Supp. 3d 379, 384 (E.D.N.Y. 2019) (internal citation
omitted); see also Donald P. Green & Daniel Winik, Using Random Judge Assignments
to Estimate the Effects of Incarceration and Probation on Recidivism among Drug
Offenders, 48 Criminology 357 (2010) (study of over a thousand offenders whose
sentences varied substantially in prison time and probation found that such
variations “have no detectable effect on rates of re-arrest,” and that “[t]hose
assigned by chance to receive prison time and their counterparts who received no
prison time were re-arrested at similar rates over a four-year time frame”). Stated
differently, prison, by disrupting education and employment, reducing prospects
for future employment, weakening family ties and exposing less serious offenders
to older more serious offenders, has the potential to actually increase recidivism.
15
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 16 of 23 PageID
3384
See Criminogenic Effects of Imprisonment: Evidence from State Panel Data 1974-2002, 6
Criminology & Public Policy 589 (2007).
Here, Mr. Simmerer committed non-violent fraud offenses. He is turning 50
years old later this summer. As defendants reach middle age or older, their risk
of recidivism declines. In fact, the Sentencing Commission has found “that
younger offenders were more likely to be rearrested than older offenders, were
rearrested faster than older offenders, and committed more serious offenses after
they were released than older offenders.” See U.S. Sent’g Comm’n, Effects of
Aging on Recidivism Among Federal Offenders, Dec. 2017, available at
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-
publications/research-publications/2017/20171207_Recidivism-Age.pdf (last
visited on June 9, 2026) at 28. The Commission further noted that for those
defendants age 50 and older there was a median range of one arrest during an
eight-year follow-up period in comparison to three arrests for defendants younger
than 30 during the same follow-up period. Id.; see also Simon v. United States, 361
F. Supp. 2d 35, 48 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (basing variance in part on defendant’s age of
50 upon release because recidivism drops substantially with age); United States v.
Nellum, No. 2:04-CR-30 PS, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1568, at *8-9 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 3,
2005) (granting variance to a 57-year-old defendant because recidivism drops with
age and noting that likelihood of recidivism was “very low”); United States v.
16
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 17 of 23 PageID
3385
Phinney, 599 F. Supp. 2d 1037, 1041-1046 (E.D. Wisc. 2009). Here, Mr. Simmerer’s
age upon release is another mitigating factor indicating his risk of recidivism will
be significantly reduced going forward.
G. The Need To Avoid Unwarranted Disparities
Section 3553(a)(6) forbids not all sentencing disparities but only
“unwarranted” ones “among defendants with similar records who have been
found guilty of similar conduct.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). The granting of a
downward variance for Mr. Simmerer would not create unwarranted disparity.
In fact, other defendants convicted of PPP loan fraud have received sentences
below Mr. Simmerer’s advisory guideline range. See e.g., United States v. Casey
Crowther, No. 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M (M.D. Fla. June 29, 2021) (Doc. 164) (Steele,
J.) (press release available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdfl/pr/fort-myers-
businessman-sentenced-three-years-federal-prison-covid-relief-fraud-and) (37
months imprisonment for a Fort Myers businessman who sought and obtained
$2.1 million in PPP loans and also participated in a $1.3 million mortgage fraud
scheme; defendant used some proceeds to purchase a $700,000 boat; defendant
was convicted after trial); United States v. Samer Kammo, No. 2:23-cr-20296-JJCG-
APP (E.D. Mich. Feb. 17, 2026) (Doc. 98) (Grey, J.) (press release available at
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edmi/pr/shelby-township-resident-sentenced-
multi-million-dollar-pandemic-assistance-fraud) (defendant received a sentence
17
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 18 of 23 PageID
3386
of 36 months imprisonment for his role in a $2.5 million PPP loan fraud scheme;
restitution in the same amount was ordered indicating that the government did
not recover the money); United States v. Joshua Bellamy, No. 0:21-cr-60064-RKA
(S.D. Fla. Dec. 14, 2021) (Doc. 60) (Altman, J.) (press release available at
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-nfl-player-sentenced-more-
three-years-prison-covid-19-relief-fraud) (former NFL player sentenced to 37
months imprisonment for fraudulently obtaining $1.2 million in PPP loans and
using funds on personal items such as jewelry and Casino trips; this defendant
also sought PPP loans for family and close associates and paid kickbacks to a co-
conspirator); United States v. Jesika Blakely, No. 1:20-cr-00296-JPB-CMS (N.D. Ga.
Feb. 8, 2023) (Doc. 631) (Boulee, J.) (press release available at
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga/pr/fraudster-receives-prison-sentence-
illegal-paycheck-protection-program-scheme) (defendant sentenced to 36 months
imprisonment and ordered to pay $5,348,498.89 in restitution, thus true loss
amount was significant).
In addition, Judiciary Sentencing Information (“JSIN”) statistics compiled
by the Sentencing Commission for similarly situated defendants demonstrates that
over the last five fiscal years those offenders whose primary guideline section,
offense level, and criminal history category were the same as Mr. Simmerer,
received an average sentence of 57 months imprisonment. See U.S. Sent'g Comm'n,
18
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 19 of 23 PageID
3387
Judiciary Sentencing Information (available at
https://jsin.ussc.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Dashboard) (selecting primary guideline
U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1, criminal-history category III, and total offense level 25) (results
attached hereto as Exhibit F). Other courts have relied on data from JSIN in
determining the appropriateness of a sentence. See e.g. United States v. McDaniel,
59 F.4th 975, 979 (8th Cir. 2023); United States v. Arias, Case No. 3:11-cr-00494-HZ-
1, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54891, at *6 (D. Or. Mar. 28, 2023); United States v. Lampkin,
Case No. 3:15-cr-00005-SLG, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140971, at *4 (D. Alaksa Aug.
11, 2023).
H. Community Support
Despite his struggles and the outcome of his recent trial, Mr. Simmerer
continues to have strong support from members of his community. Attached
hereto are the following character letters submitted by several individuals, many
of whom have known Mr. Simmerer for decades:
Exhibit G: Letter from Charles Massab, a realtor who met Mr. Simmerer
through transformational training and characterized him as a “Kind, Caring,
friendly, nice, easy to work with, a good dresser, polite, he had a desire to help
people and was invested and committed to excellence in the training and helping
people. [sic.].” See Exhibit G.
19
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 20 of 23 PageID
3388
Exhibit H: Letter from Samuel Robert Garwood, who has known Mr.
Simmerer since 2012. Exhibit H. Mr. Garwood employed Mr. Simmerer at his
HVAC business for five years and trusted the defendant with his personal and
business accounts and passwords. Id. Mr. Garwood characterized Mr. Simmerer
as “honest and fair in his business and personal relationships.” Id. Notably, Mr.
Garwood wrote to the Court that he has a job waiting for Mr. Simmerer back in
Michigan once he completes his sentence in this case. Id. Mr. Garwood also
confirmed that Mr. Simmerer is the “sole caretaker” for his 71 year old mother who
has experienced “medical complications from her most recent surgery.” Id.
Exhibit I: Letter from Kristine Burr, who has known Mr. Simmerer since
2011 and provided the following information:
Throughout our acquaintance, Shawn has consistently demonstrated
integrity and authenticity. He approaches others with kindness and
fairness, possessing a natural ability to inspire trust. Shawn
genuinely seeks the good in others and gives of himself freely to
support those around him. . . . . Additionally, Shawn is a devoted
caretaker to his mother. He has embraced this responsibility with
love and dedication, viewing it as an opportunity to give back rather
than as a burden. His attentiveness further demonstrates his
compassion and sense of responsibility.
See Exhibit I.
Exhibit J: Letter from Heather Lynne Horning who did “a great amount
of volunteer work in Florida” with Mr. Simmerer for “several years.” Exhibit J.
According to Ms. Horning, Mr. Simmerer is “a dependable person, consistently
20
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 21 of 23 PageID
3389
showing up for others, professional and courteous.” Id. She further wrote that
“he dedicated himself to being in service to other people and supporting them in
their dreams.” Id.
Exhibit K: Letter from Carol Lineberry, a Doctor of Nursing Practice, who
met Mr. Simmerer in 2019 through his Your 10 Life Foundation. Exhibit K. Ms.
Lineberry praised Mr. Simmerer with helping her move past self-doubt and
negativity in her life. Id. She specifically wrote “I am now thriving both personally
and professionally, and I attribute much of the mindset shift that made this
possible to the encouragement and perspective I gained through my friendship
with Shawn.” Id.
Exhibit L: Letter from Terezinha Gonzalez, who knew Mr. Simmerer since
he was a ten year old boy. Exhibit L. In her letter, Ms. Gonzalez described the
kindness Mr. Simmerer exhibited starting at a young age. Id. Specifically, she
described him giving her son money for medicine she needed. Id. She also
described how Mr. Simmerer regularly helped an elderly woman who lived in the
same condominium as Mr. Simmerer’s family. Id.
Exhibit M: Letter from Claudia Marrera, a transformational leadership
coach who has known Mr. Simmerer since 2012. Exhibit M. She wrote that she
has witnessed Mr. Simmerer “work tirelessly toward projects he believed would
positively impact others.” Id. She also candidly observed that she witnessed him
21
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 22 of 23 PageID
3390
“struggle with impulsivity and poor judgment under pressure” but she also
believed “he is capable of growth and rehabilitation.” Id.
In sum, Mr. Simmerer has the kind of support that speaks to his positive
character and his genuine desire to help others. He is a compassionate and loving
person whose life will be disrupted and irreparably impacted by another felony
conviction and a period of incarceration. He humbly begs this Court to consider
the good with the bad and extend him a grant of mercy at sentencing.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the arguments and authority set forth herein, as well as the
information attached hereto, Mr. Simmerer respectfully requests that this Court
grant a downward variance and impose a sentence that is “sufficient, but not
greater than necessary.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). He further asks the Court to permit
him to self-surrender to his designated BOP facility. Lastly, he respectfully asks
that the Court recommend that he be designated to a BOP facility that can
accommodate his current prescription regimen.
Respectfully submitted this 9th day of June, 2026.
/s/ Andrew C. Searle
ANDREW C. SEARLE, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0116461
22
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN Document 294 Filed 06/09/26 Page 23 of 23 PageID
3391
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on June 9, 2026 I electronically filed the foregoing with
the clerk of the court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of
electronic filing to all parties of record.
/s/ Andrew C. Searle
ANDREW C. SEARLE, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0116461
SEARLE LAW P.A.
200 East Robinson Street, Suite 1150
Orlando, Florida 32801
Telephone: 407-952-0642
Email: andrew@searle-law.com
Attorney for Defendant Simmerer
23
File and source
- File
- 294-sentencing-memorandum-by-shawn-michael-simmerer.pdf
- Size
- 397,224 bytes
- SHA-256
- 9e65fd9e68b377d2fe93431e7ae701f737753bacdf4288c893889879af61d0e4
- Original
- PACER (login required)