Sentencing Memorandum, United States v. Jorge S. Alvarez, No. 9:22-cr-80118 (S.D. Fla., January 20, 2023)

Summary

A defense sentencing memorandum for Jorge S. Alvarez in United States of America v. Jorge S. Alvarez, Case No. 22-CR-80118, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket January 20, 2023 as Document 172. It states that Alvarez is being sentenced for conspiracy to commit money laundering under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h), and argues under Booker and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) for a downward departure or variance. The memorandum states that Alvarez opened Saihdel Trucking, that the company's difficulties led to the offense, and that Alvarez made two payments toward the PPP loan before arrest and cooperated with the government. It asks for a sentence minimally sufficient to achieve the purposes of punishment and is signed /s/ by defense counsel Alfredo A. Izaguirre.

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

Full text

Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 172 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 1 of 5




                                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                                        CASE NO. 22-CR-80118

  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
       Plaintiff
  vs.

  JORGE S. ALVAREZ
        Defendant.
  ___________________________________________/

                                  SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

         Defendant Jorge S. Alvarez (hereafter “Alvarez”) is being sentenced upon his

  adjudication of guilty to Conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of Title 18,

  United States Code, Section 1956(h).

         The Court is aware of the broad ramifications of United States v. Booker for these

  proceedings. The sentencing guideline range is no longer binding on the Court, but is only one of

  five factors to be considered in determining the sentence. Booker, 125 S. Ct. at 764-65. The other

  four factors are (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense, and history and characteristics of

  the defendant; (2) the kinds of sentences available; (3) the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing

  disparity; and (4) the need to provide restitution. Id. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(3), (a)(6)-(7).

  In considering the Section 3553(a) factors, the sentencing guidelines are to be given no more or

  less weight than any other factor. See United States v. Jaber, 362 F. Supp. 2d 365, 37076 (D.

  Mass 2005)(providing comprehensive analysis of why sentencing guidelines do not

  reflect statutory purposes of punishment; United States v. Ranum, 353 F. Supp. 2d 984, 987

  (E.D. Wis. 2005).

         Perhaps even more important, however, is that Booker establishes a new, independent

  limit on the sentence that may be imposed. The primary sentencing mandate of Section 3553(a)

                                                    1
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 172 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 2 of 5




  states that courts must impose the minimally-sufficient sentence to achieve the statutory

  purposes of punishment- justice, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. The court shall

  impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purpose set forth

  in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(2).

          The Court should consider a downward departure/variance pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553

  (a). The mandate of § 3553(a) is, of course, for the Court to "impose a sentence sufficient, but

  not greater than necessary, to comply" with the purpose of sentencing set forth in the second

  paragraph of the same statute.

          In Hunt, the Eleventh Circuit rejected "any across the board prescription regarding the

  appropriate deference to give the guidelines." Id. at 1184. Rather, a "district court may

  determine, on a case by case basis, the weight to give the Guidelines, so long as that

  determination is made with reference to the remaining section 3553(a) factors that the court must

  also consider in calculation the defendants' sentence." Id. at 1185. Thus, as recognized by the

  Court in United States v. Glover, 431 F.3d 744, 752-753 (11th Cir. 2005), in some cases the

  Guidelines may have little persuasive force in light of some of the other § 3553(a) factors. The

  Eleventh Circuit's position is clear:

          "The decisions of this Court principally distinguish between varying from an advisory
  Guideline range based on a case specific, individualized application of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
  factors and varying from an advisory Guideline range based on a categorical rejection of
  Congress's clearly expressed sentencing policy as embedded in the Guideline and in its statutes.
  The latter amounts to error, while the former falls within the scope of the district court's
  discretion intended by Booker."

  United States v. Williams, 472 F.3d 835, 835-836 (11th Cir. 2006) (Black, J. concurring in the

  denial of rehearing en banc). See also, United States v. Ennis, 468 F.Supp. 2d 228, 235 (D. Mass

  2006) ("treating offenders who are not equally culpable the same is a false equality, not at all




                                                   2
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 172 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 3 of 5




  consistent with the admonition "to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants

  with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct.")

                 POST-BOOKER 3553(a) SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS

                                  Alvarez's Personal Characteristics

         Alvarez is currently 51 years old. He was born and raised in Cuba. He was raised by his

  parents along with his siblings in a lower income household. Alvarez came from Cuba in 2002 at

  32 years of age. When he arrived, he worked in whatever was available to obtain work as a

  baker. He then later obtained employment in construction and soon after opened his own

  trucking company named Saihdel Trucking. The company and Alvarez were going through

  difficult times and is what led Alvarez to become involved in the offense. Alvarez has always

  been gainfully employed and has no gaps in his employment. He currently provides for his wife

  and his minor son who depend on him for support. Attached as exhibits are letters from

  Alvarez’s wife, cousin, and friend who corroborate the kind of person he is.

     Reflect the Seriousness of the Offense, to Promote Respect for the Law, and to Provide Just
                                     Punishment for the Offense

         Although this is a serious offense and Alvarez should be punished for what he did, a

  guideline sentence does not necessarily equate to a sentence that adequately reflects Alvarez’s

  personal characteristics. A guideline sentence in this case for Alvarez, when taking into account

  all other factors is excessively harsh for such a crime and an individual such as Alvarez. He

  understands and has admitted that his conduct is unacceptable and understands that he deserves

  to be punished. Although not an excuse for his actions, he was lured by the ability to be able to

  provide a better life for his family. Alvarez is very ashamed for what he has done and took steps

  to correct his mistakes. He made arrangements to pay back the PPP loan and made two payments

  toward the loan before his arrest and plans to continue to make payments. Alvarez has also tried

                                                   3
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 172 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 4 of 5




  to break away with his criminal conduct by cooperating with the Government to the fullest extent

  possible within his abilities.

                          The Need to Avoid Unwarranted Sentence Disparity

          Alvarez deserves to be punished for his actions but should be punished proportionately

  with his conduct considering the punishment received by other individuals in his same position.

                          To Afford Adequate Deterrence of Criminal Conduct

          Alvarez should be sentenced to a sentence that sends a message to individuals who

  transgress society's laws, and demonstrates that this conduct will not be tolerated, while at the

  same time complying with the mandate that the sentence should be sufficient, but not greater

  than necessary to accomplish the objectives established by 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

                       To Protect the Public from Further Crimes of the Defendant

          This is a significant factor in imposing sentence. Alvarez has never had contact with law

  enforcement before this case. Except for the conduct in this case, Alvarez has always been a

  hard-working law-abiding citizen. He has a supportive family, has learned from his mistakes, and

  is not likely to continue to commit crimes.


                                            CONCLUSION

          For all of the above reasons, this Court should impose upon Alvarez a sentence

  minimally sufficient to achieve the statutory purpose of punishment considering all the above-

  mentioned factors.

                                                                Respectfully submitted,

                                                                /s/Alfredo A. Izaguirre
                                                                Alfredo A. Izaguirre, Esq.
                                                                338 Minorca Ave.
                                                                Coral Gables, FL 33134
                                                                Tel:(305)442-0425

                                                   4
Case 9:22-cr-80118-DMM Document 172 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2023 Page 5 of 5




                                                              Fax:(305)442-0429
                                                              FL Bar# 13556

                                  CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

        I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 20, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing with the

  Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notice of electronic filing to all

   parties.

                                                              /s/Alfredo A. Izaguirre
                                                              Alfredo A. Izaguirre, Esq.




                                                  5


File and source

File

172-sentencing-memorandum-by-jorge-s-alvarez.pdf

Size

494,101 bytes

SHA-256

10b85894deee0c5a6ddd908dbdd660d14ed7259780304cd2cabd698d88cca258

Our copy

172-sentencing-memorandum-by-jorge-s-alvarez.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)