Sentencing Memorandum of Defendant Jasmine Spencer, No. 2:24-cr-00192 (S.D. W. Va., July 31, 2025)

Summary

The defendant's sentencing memorandum in United States v. Jasmine Spencer, Case No. 2:24-cr-00192-007, before the Honorable Irene C. Berger in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, filed July 31, 2025 as Document 350 by counsel John J. Balenovich. It states that Spencer does not object to the presentence report's guideline calculation of a Total Offense Level of seven (7), criminal history category I and a range of zero (0) months to six (6) months. Because the offense is a Class B felony, probation is unavailable under 18 U.S.C. § 3561(a)(1), and the memorandum asks for zero months of imprisonment with home confinement and two years of supervised release. It argues under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) from her caretaking responsibilities, her lack of criminal history and her obligation to repay $15,625. Sentencing was scheduled for August 21, 2025.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page 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 of Defendant Jasmine Spencer, No. 2:24-cr-00192 (S.D. W. Va., July 31, 2025).” Original at ecf.wvsd.uscourts.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/sentencing-memorandum-united-states-v-jasmine-spencer-dkt-350-s-d-w-va-5eaedc72f4/, SHA-256 b0a8e8b4b7e747ae40b8e78108e9aaa51de4c09a2a9d53dc223e4130ef5ed8f8.

Full text

Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2347

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHARLESTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V. Case No.: 2:24-cr-00192-007
The Honorable Irene C. Berger
JASMINE SPENCER

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OF
DEFENDANT JASMINE SPENCER

Now comes defendant, Jasmine Spencer, by and through counsel, John J. Balenovich,

Esq., and submits this memorandum for consideration by this Honorable Court for her

upcoming sentencing, currently scheduled on August 21, 2025. For the reasons set forth

below, this Court has the discretion to sentence Ms. Spencer to home confinement or

imprisonment. Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (hereinafter U.S.S.G.), because

the offense is a Class B felony, a sentence of probation is impermissible. 18 U.S.C. §

3561(a)(1). Therefore, a sentence of zero (0) months of imprisonment along with two years

of supervised release is sufficient but not greater than necessary to comply with the stated

goals of the United States Sentencing Commission.

I. Objections to Report

Ms. Spencer has no objections to the report. Ms. Spencer would like to make one

addition to her mental and emotional health. Ms. Spencer has a cognitive issue that slows her

ability to understand information being relayed to her through speech or written

communication.

II. Guideline Calculation

Ms. Spencer does not object to the guideline calculation made by the probation

Page 1 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2348

officer. Based upon a Total Offense Level of seven (7) and a criminal history category of I, the

guideline imprisonment range is zero (0) months to six (6) months. PIR, Paragraph 47.

III. Discussion of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) Sentencing Factors

As this Court is aware, the United States Code mandates the District Court “shall

impose a sentence of the kind, and within the range, …unless the court finds that there exists

an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into

consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines that should result

in a sentence different from that described.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b)(1). The sentencing of Ms.

Spencer should be driven by the “overarching provision” of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), which

instructs district courts to “impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary” to

accomplish the goals of sentencing. Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 89 (2007)

(quoting Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 56 (2007)).

Section 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) mandates that the Court shall consider “the nature and

circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant.” 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a)(1). When examining the defendant for sentencing purposes, the Court must treat

the sentencing guidelines as “effectively advisory” and consider them as just one of a number

of sentencing factors the Court must take into account. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220,

245 (2005). Finally, the district court has great discretion in fashioning a sentence that is

sufficient “but not greater than necessary,” based upon an individual analysis of the sentencing

factors concerning Ms. Spencer. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

In determining an appropriate sentence, this Court is “to consider every convicted

person as an individual and every case as a unique study in human failings that sometimes

mitigate, sometimes magnify, the crime and the punishment to ensue.” Koon v. United States,

518 U.S. 113 (1996). While the Sentencing Guidelines are considered the “starting point” for

Page 2 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 2349

sentencing proceedings, district courts can consider a variety of factors outlined in 18 U.S.C.

§3553(a) to craft a fair and reasonable sentence for each defendant individually. Gall, 552 U.S.

at 49.

A zero (0) month sentence is appropriate in this case for two reasons based on Ms.

Spencer’s individual 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors. The best argument for a zero (0) month

sentence in Ms. Spencer’s case is the defendant’s role as the primary caretaker of her four

children, one of whom has a persistent traumatic brain injury. PIR, Paragraph 38. A zero-

month sentence is also warranted in this case due to Ms. Spencer's lack of criminal history

and her status as a first-time felon.

A. Nature and Circumstances of the Offense

Defendant Spencer took responsibility for her criminal conduct in this case. Ms. Spencer

pleaded guilty to the indictment and met the expectations agreed to by both parties in the

plea agreement. Instead of putting on a defense that would have wasted government

resources and not served the interests of justice or the truth, Ms. Spencer stepped forward

and accepted responsibility for her actions.

B. History and Characteristics of the Defendant.

The primary mitigating factor warranting the requested sentence in Ms. Spencer’s

unique situation is her role as the primary caretaker of her four children. Ms. Spencer is a

single mother and the physical custodian of four minor children aged 15, 6, 9, and 10. Her

10-year-old child has a significant disability, specifically a persistent traumatic brain injury

resulting from shaken baby syndrome. PIR, Paragraph 38.

If Ms. Spencer is sentenced to prison, it will result in a significant and direct loss of

essential care for her four children. Ms. Spencer is the only caretaker they have ever known.

The fathers of three of her children have not been involved in their lives; two of the fathers

Page 3 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 2350

have either passed away or are not allowed to be around the children due to abusive

behavior. PIR, Paragraph 38. A sentence of zero (0) months, followed by two years of

supervised release, would be a sufficient sentence that addresses the need for caretaking

support without being overly punitive.

Given these circumstances, the loss of Ms. Spencer as a caretaker would have a far

greater impact than the typical consequences of incarceration. She has been the sole

caretaker and the only parent her children know. There are no effective alternatives, which

means that her absence would be a devastating blow to her children’s stability and

emotional well-being, as they may lose their only parent. Ms. Spencer is simply

irreplaceable.

The second most crucial factor that supports Ms. Spencer’s requested sentence is

her lack of a criminal record. Ms. Spencer is a first-time felon. Ms. Spencer’s total criminal

history score is zero, and she falls into the criminal history category of I. PIR, Paragraph

30. Ms. Spencer’s lack of criminal history demonstrates that she is someone who would

not present a danger to her neighbors in her community if she were to be placed on

supervised release. Furthermore, her lack of criminal history suggests that Ms. Spencer

knows how to navigate society without engaging in unlawful behavior.

It is clear from Jasmine Spencer's criminal history score that she is not a career

criminal. Given her background, even a minor criminal charge, let alone a felony

conviction, constitutes a significant punishment. She must live with the reality of her

involvement in criminal behavior, and for many years, she will need to explain her choices

and actions to her children. The consequences of her actions will not only affect her but

will also have a detrimental impact on her children, who were completely unaware of what

was happening with their mother. This impact would only worsen if Ms. Spencer received

Page 4 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 2351

a prison sentence.

It is important to note that Ms. Spencer’s criminal behavior did not target any specific

individuals and did not involve violence. Despite any criticisms regarding her actions, this

was her first serious offense of any kind.

C. The Need for the Sentence Imposed to Reflect the Seriousness of the Offense, to
Promote Respect for the Law and to Provide Just Punishment for the Offense.

Given the totality of the circumstances, Ms. Spencer is requesting a prison sentence of

zero (0) months, along with two years of supervised release. For a single mother of four

children, the requirements of supervised release represent a significant penalty. The

implications of having a felony conviction, along with the obligation to repay $15,625 to a

large corporation and the daily living restrictions that would remain in effect during the

supervised release, would appropriately reflect the seriousness of Ms. Spencer’s offense. This

would constitute a just punishment, ensure public safety, and serve as an effective deterrent

for both Ms. Spencer and others. Overall, this approach would sufficiently meet the

sentencing objectives outlined under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2) without being excessive.

D. The Need for the Sentence to Afford Adequate Deterrence to Criminal Conduct

Defendant Spencer submits that a lengthy prison sentence is unnecessary in

this instance to deter future criminal conduct. She argues that a sentence of zero (0)

months in prison with home incarceration and two years of supervised release crafts a

fair and reasonable sentence considering the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors, the ends of

justice, and provide a deterrence for other criminal conduct.

Furthermore, Ms. Spencer argues that longer custodial sentences do not

prevent reoffending nor reduce recidivism. Recidivism refers to a person's relapse into

criminal behavior, often after the person receives sanctions or undergoes intervention

Page 5 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 2352

for a previous crime.1 Longer prison sentences create difficulties for people re-entering

society after prison because they reduce their ability to secure employment and

housing.2 Lengthy prison sentences also increase recidivism rates because a person

leaving prison after a long sentence has an overall lack of financial security that

negatively impacts one’s ability to succeed after prison. 3

IV. Conclusion

As set forth above and considering the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors, Ms. Spencer submits

that a fair and reasonable sentence in her case is a sentence of zero (0) months in prison with

home incarceration and two years of supervised release.

Ms. Spencer is unlikely to reoffend due to her responsibilities as a caregiver for her

four children and her minimal criminal history. A sentence of zero months, with home

confinement and supervised release, would reflect the seriousness of her actions and deter

similar behavior in the community.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances in Ms. Spencer’s case, a

sentence of zero (0) months with home confinement and supervised release is sufficient, but

not greater than necessary, to comply with the stated goals of the United States Sentencing

Commission.

Therefore, for the above reasons, Jasmine Spencer requests that this court impose the

suggested sentence during her sentencing hearing on August 21, 2025.

1
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism
2
https://docs.iza.org/dp14022.pdf
3
Id.

Page 6 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 2353

JASMINE SPENCER
By Counsel,

/s/ John J. Balenovich
JOHN J. BALENOVICH, ESQ.
WV Bar No. 10179
John J. Balenovich Law Offices, LC
1554 Kanawha Blvd., East Ste. 100
Charleston, West Virginia 25311
Telephone: (304) 541-0404
Facsimile: (304) 407-7092
E-mail: john@wvlitigator.com
Counsel for Jasmine Spencer

Page 7 of 8
Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 350 Filed 07/31/25 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 2354

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHARLESTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V. Case No.: 2:24-cr-00192-007
The Honorable Irene C. Berger
JASMINE SPENCER

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, John J. Balenovich, Esq., hereby certify that on July 31, 2025, I filed a true and

accurate copy of the attached Sentencing Memorandum of Defendant Jasmine Spencer and

Certificate of Service with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send

notification to the following CM/ECF participants:

Jonathan Tyler Storage, Esq.
Jennifer Dowdy Gordon, Esq.
Assistant United States Attorneys
300 Virginia Street East, Suite 4000
Charleston, West Virginia 25301
Telephone: (304) 345-2200
E-mail: Jonathan.Storage@usdoj.gov
E-mail: Jennifer.Gordon@usdoj.gov

Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ John J. Balenovich
JOHN J. BALENOVICH, ESQ.
West Virginia Bar No.: 10179
John J. Balenovich Law Offices, LC
1554 Kanawha Blvd., East Ste. 100
Charleston, West Virginia 25311
Telephone: (304) 541-0404
Facsimile: (304) 407-7092
E-mail: john@wvlitigator.com
Counsel for Jasmine Spencer

Page 8 of 8

File and source

File: 350-sentencing-memorandum-as-to-jasmine-spencer.pdf
Size: 625,395 bytes
SHA-256: b0a8e8b4b7e747ae40b8e78108e9aaa51de4c09a2a9d53dc223e4130ef5ed8f8
Our copy: 350-sentencing-memorandum-as-to-jasmine-spencer.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)