Free Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 PAUL K. CHARLTON
United States _Attomey
2 District of Arizona
3 l2;§iE§ %.§T’Fd¥I£a
Arizona State Bar No. 012409
40 N. Central Suite 1200
4 i~“i’°t"’ ‘°¥Z§§33°‘§i4 mi
5 'oEt§ph.?:·lt<§_ uszio`. ov
6
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
9 United States of America,
CR—02·00394-PHX-EHC
10 Piaimin; ~
v. GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO
11 THE COURT’S ORDER OF
12 Gregory Lee Stauffer, OCTOBER 7, 2005
13 Defendant.
14 The United States of America, by and through counsel undersigned, hereby responds to the
15 Court’s order of October 7, 2005, wherein the Court referred a request of the defendant to the
16 Government for its consideration.
17 Defendant Stauffer pled guilty on September 10 , 2002, to five counts of possession of
18 stolen mail and conversion of postal money orders. On June 3, 2003, the defendant was
19 sentenced to seventy-one months in prison, to be followed by a thirty-six month term of
20 supervised release. According to the October 7, 2005, court order, the court recommended to
21 the Bureau of Prisons on September 9, 2005, that the defendant be allowed to participate in a
22 residential drug abuse program (RDAP) when eligible. According to an undated letter Hom the
23 defendant to the court, the defendant completed the RDAP on September 2, 2005. Though
2 4 individuals who complete such a program generally get some time deducted from their
25 sentences, according to the defendant, the institution in which he is serving his time does not
26 give such credit to inmates who are serving time for gun charges, or received a sentencing
27 enhancement for use of a firearm. The Court’s order of October 7, 2005, notes that the
28 September 10, 2002, plea agreement does not refer to a firearm.
se 2:02-cr-00394-EHC Document 68-4 Filed O5/O2/2006 Page 1 of 2

1
1 Undersigned counsel has looked into whether the defendant’s sentence included a firearm
2 enhancement. The Presentence Report in this case recommended a two point adjustment under
3 section 2B 1 . 1 (b)(l l)(B) as the "offense involved the possession of a firearm in connection with
4 the offense." Presentence Report at paragraph 34. .
5 At sentencing, the defendant objected to the firearms enhancement arguing that the gun was
6 merely present. This court ruled “With respect to the firearm, I believe, Mr. Nickerson, Mr.
7 Stauffer, that all reasonable inferences in all ofthe records support the fact that Mr. Stauffer had
8 a firearm, carried it in his car for purposes of his criminal activities? (RT 6/3/03 at 73.) The
9 court then overruled the defendant’s objection and calculated the above—mentioned sentence
10 based upon the addition of the firearms enhancement.
1 1 Undersigned counsel defers to the Bureau of Prisons as to whether, and tmder what
12 circumstances, it will credit a defendant’s sentence for participation in a drug treatment program.
13 With respect to whether the defendant’s sentence was enhanced because he possessed a firearm
14 during the commission of his offense, it is clear that he did and that this court found that he did.
15 Respectfully submitted this 10th day of March 2006.
16 PAUL K. CHARLTON
United States Attorney
17 A District of Arizona
18
s/ Joseph C. Welgg
19 JOSE H C. WE TY
Assistant U.S. Attorney
20 CERTIFICATE QF §ER\/ICE
21 I hereby certify that on March I0, 2006,
I electronically transmitted the attached
22 document to the Clerk’s Office using the
CM/ECF system for filing and
23 sent by U.S. mail to:
24 Gregory Lee Stauffer, 46861-008
FMC-Houston - Federal Medical Center
25 P.O. Box 15330
Ft. Worth, TX 76119
26
s/ ,j0.segh Q. Welg; I
27 Josnpn c. wntrv
Assistant U.S. Attorney
28
2
ase 2:O2—cr-OO394—EHC Document 68-4 Filed O5/O2/2006 Page 2 of 2

Case 2:02-cr-00394-EHC

Document 68-4

Filed 05/02/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:02-cr-00394-EHC

Document 68-4

Filed 05/02/2006

Page 2 of 2