usa v. vigue, 1-06-cr-00160, no. 17 (w.d.n.c. jun. 18, 2007)

11
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHVILLE DIVISION Docket No. 1:06CR160 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. NORMAN WILFRED VIGUE, Defendant SENTENCING MEMORANDUM Now comes the defendant, Norman Wilfred Vigue, through counsel and submits this Sentencing Memorandum in support of his position, specifically, that this Court sentence Mr. Vigue to the mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months incarceration. A sentence greater than 60 months would be unjust and would be far greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of 18 U.S.C. §3553. I. Facts Mr. Vigue spends most of his free time making sure that house bound senior citizens receive a nutritious meal. By chairing the volunteer program for his church to assist in the delivery of Friendship Trays 1 , Norm Vigue 1 Friendship Trays is Charlotte’s Meals on Wheels affiliate. Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 1 of 11

Upload: watchkeep

Post on 13-Sep-2015

9.233 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

Sentencing Memorandum

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1

    UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHEWESTERNDISTRICTOFNORTHCAROLINA

    ASHVILLEDIVISION

    DocketNo.1:06CR160UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA

    v.

    NORMANWILFREDVIGUE,Defendant

    SENTENCINGMEMORANDUM

    Nowcomesthedefendant,NormanWilfredVigue,throughcounseland

    submitsthisSentencingMemoranduminsupportofhisposition,specifically,

    thatthisCourtsentenceMr.Viguetothemandatoryminimumsentenceof60

    monthsincarceration.

    Asentencegreaterthan60monthswouldbeunjustandwouldbefargreater

    thannecessarytocomplywiththepurposesof18U.S.C.3553.

    I. Facts

    Mr.Viguespendsmostofhisfreetimemakingsurethathousebound

    seniorcitizensreceiveanutritiousmeal.Bychairingthevolunteerprogram

    forhischurchtoassistinthedeliveryofFriendshipTrays1,NormVigue

    1 Friendship Trays is CharlottesMealsonWheelsaffiliate.

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 1 of 11

  • 2

    ensuresover1600nutritiousmealsamonthwillbedeliveredtotheelderly

    andinfirmwhowouldotherwisenotreceiveanythingtoeat.

    In2004,NormanViguefoundhisfaith.Likemanypeople,itwasinhis

    darkesthour.Mr.Vigueslonelinessfollowinghisdivorceledtoanaddiction

    topornography.BeforeNormantrulyhitbottom,heorderedavideo

    purportingtocontainyoungteenshavingsexthatwassolicitedtohimaspart

    ofanundercovergovernmentinvestigation.Thereceiptofthisvideoisthe

    conductthatMr.VigueistobesentencedforbeforethisCourt.

    Immediatelyafterthevideowasdeliveredtohishouse,thegovernment

    agentsidentifiedthemselves,andMr.Viguespokefreelywiththem.They

    foundnootherillegalorevenpornographicvideos.Hewasnotarrested.

    Normwenttohischurch.Hebegancounselingwithadoctoraswellas

    spiritualcounselingtoaddresshisproblemwithpornographyandtofindthe

    root.Hispastorrequiredthatheinstallantipornsoftwareonhiscomputer

    thatwouldnotifyothersifheweretoventuredownthisdarkroad.Norm

    didsoandsetupbothhissoninlawandastaffmemberofthechurchto

    receivereportsfromthesoftware.Pretrialserviceshavealsoreceived

    reports.

    Normbegantothriveinchurch.Hewasnolongerlonely,hebegantofeel

    thathislifehadnewmeaningandthathewasmakingadifferenceinothers

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 2 of 11

  • 3

    lives.Hisfaithhasbroughthimfriendship,peace,andstrengthtoovercome

    hisaddictiontopornography.

    Ayearandahalfafterthevideowasdeliveredtohishome;hewas

    arrestedontheinstantcharges.

    TheSundaybeforeNormanenteredhisguiltyplea,hespoketoacrowdof

    almosttwothousand.Hisministeraskedhimtotellthecongregationhis

    storyoffailureandfaith.2Hetoldthecongregationthepathhehadgone

    down,thathisfaithhassavedhimfromalifeofbothsinandcrime,andthat

    itishisfaiththatcontinuestocarryhimandwillgivehimstrengthashe

    spendsthenextfiveyearsofhislifeinprison.Itishisfaiththatremindshim

    hecanstillmakeadifference,thathecandogood.

    SummaryoftheArgument

    Asentenceof60months,thestatutoryminimum,isappropriate.Any

    greatersentencewouldbefargreaterthannecessarytoreflecttheseriousness

    oftheoffense,promoterespectforthelaw,providejustpunishment,afford

    adequatedeterrencetocriminalconduct,protectthepublicfromfurther

    crimescommittedbythedefendant,andprovidethedefendantwith

    correctionaltreatment.Theappropriateguidelinesentenceisasentence

    2 Letters from members of the congregation are attached as Appendix A to demonstrate the impact Mr. Vigue has had on their lives.

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 3 of 11

  • 4

    belowthestatutoryminimumofsixtymonths.Therefore,theappropriate

    sentenceisasentenceofsixtymonths.

    Sentencingobjections

    1. A4levelenhancementunderUSSG2G2.2(b)(4)shouldnotapply.

    (PreSentenceReport,Paragraph34).

    BoththeGovernmentanddefenseagreethatthisenhancementfor

    sadomasochisticconduct,shouldnotapply.

    Theenhancementwasappliedbasedonconductinthevideothatwas

    actuallydeliveredbytheGovernmenttoMr.Vigueshome.Thisvideowas

    neverorderedbyMr.Vigueandhadnosimilaritiestotheoneherequested

    exceptthatitcontainedchildpornography.ThedescriptionofthevideoMr.

    Vigueorderedwasavideoofyoungteenshavingsex.Theadvertisement,which

    wasgeneratedbytheGovernment,didnotpurporttocontainsadomasochistic

    conduct.

    ThevideodeliveredbytheGovernmentcontainedveryyoungchildrenand

    sadomasochisticconduct.TheGovernmentneededtodeliveravideowithchild

    pornographyonittosatisfytheelementsoftheoffenseintheirundercover

    investigation.Itistheunderstandingofthedefensethatthisvideowas

    randomlychosensimplytomeettherequirementofcontainingchild

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 4 of 11

  • 5

    pornography,notforthepurposeofsatisfyingarequestmyMr.Viguetoreceive

    sadomasochisticimages.

    Whilethecircuitsdisagreeonwhetherintentofthedefendantisrelevant

    (See:UnitedStatesv.Saylor,959F.2d198(11thCir.1992)andUnitedStatesv.

    Cole,61F.3d24(11thCir.1995),whichheldthatthecourterredinenhancing

    defendantssentencewhenevidencedidnotsupportdefendantsintenttoreceive

    materialinvolvingchildrenundertheageoftwelve),eventhecourtsthatapply

    strictliabilitytotheviewerexceptenhancementsoncasesinvolvingsentencing

    entrapment.UnitedStatesv.Richardson,238,F.3d837,840(7thCir.2001).

    Casesthatinvolvesadomasochisticmaterialsentbythegovernmentwithout

    evidenceofintentbythedefendantarenotheldtoastrictliabilitystandard.The

    defendantdoesnotallegethatthegovernmentwasintendingtoentraphimby

    includingsadomasochisticconductonthevideobecausethegovernmentagrees

    thisenhancementshouldnotapply.ThedefensepresentsthistotheCourtinthe

    eventthatthisCourttakesadifferentviewthanbothparties.

    Thespecificnatureofwhateverwasonthedeliveredvideoshouldhaveno

    bearingonspecificguidelineenhancements.Thisenhancementshouldnot

    apply.

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 5 of 11

  • 6

    2. A2levelenhancementunderUSSG2G2.2(b)(6)shouldnot

    apply.(PreSentenceReport,Paragraph35).

    BoththeGovernmentanddefenseagreethatthisenhancementforuseofa

    computerduringtheoffense,shouldnotapply.Mr.Viguedidnotusethe

    internettocommitanyportionofthisoffense.

    InUnitedStatesv.Dotson,324F.3d256(4thCir.2003),theCourtheldthata

    computerenhancementappliedwhenthedefendantinitiallycontactedthepostal

    inspectorviatheinternet,eventhoughallcorrespondenceconcerningthe

    specificmaterialoftheoffensewasdonethroughthemail.UnitedStates

    v.Dotson324F.3d256,257.

    Thiscaseisdifferent.Allconductthatledtothecommissionofthiscrime

    transpiredthroughtheUnitedStatesMail.Nocomputerwasusedforthe

    possession,transmission,receipt,ordistributionofthisoffense.

    WhilethegovernmentreceivedMr.Viguesnameandaddressfromwebsite

    customerdatabases,thereisnoevidencethatMr.Viguepossessed,transmitted,

    received,ordistributedillegalimagesfromthosewebsites.Further,the

    governmentsuasponteretrievedMr.Viguesphysicaladdressfromacomputer

    server,Mr.Viguemadenocontactwiththegovernmentviacomputer.

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 6 of 11

  • 7

    3. A2levelenhancementunderUSSG2G2.2(b)(7)(C)shouldapply.

    (PreSentenceReport,Paragraph36).

    BoththeGovernmentanddefenseagreethatMr.Vigueshouldbesentenced

    basedon75images,thenumberofimagesattributedtoonevideo.

    Mr.Vigueshouldonlybesentencedbasedonthevideothathereceived

    throughthemail.

    Theevidencedoesnotsupportthepresentenceinvestigators

    recommendationthatMr.Viguepossessedadditionalillegalimagesonhis

    computer.

    Thereisnoevidencethattheimagesreliedonfortheadditionalonepoint

    enhancementwereimagesofminors.Noevidenceexiststodemonstratetheir

    ageorshowthattheyarenotcomputergeneratedimages.

    Further,Mr.Viguedidnotpossesstheseimages.Hedidnotintentionally

    downloadthemnorwasheawarethattheyweresavedinanylocationonhis

    computer.Mostlikely,theseimageswereautomaticallysavedtohiscomputer

    withouthisknowledge.

    Theimagesthatwerefoundonhiscomputerwerethumbnailimagesand

    foundonhistemporaryinternetfile.Imagesareautomaticallysavedtoyour

    temporarilyinternetfile,withoutausersknowledgeorintent.Imagesina

    temporaryinternetfilearenotintentionallydownloaded.

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 7 of 11

  • 8

    Thumbnailimagesareapproximatelyinchbyinchandhaveaverylow

    resolution.Ifthesizeoftheimagewasenlarged,thelowresolutionwouldnot

    allowtheimagetobevisible.Thumbnailsaretypicallyusedwhenalarge

    numberofimagesaredisplayedonasinglepage.

    EvidencethattheimagescamefromMr.Viguestemporaryinternetfileand

    thattheimageswerethumbnailimagessupporttheconclusionthatMr.Vigue

    didnotpossesstheseimages.

    4. A2levelenhancementunderUSSG2G2.2(b)(2)shouldnotapply.

    (PreSentenceReport,Paragraph33).

    Mr.Vigueshouldnotreceiveatwopointenhancementformaterialthat

    involvedaminorwhohadnotattainedtheageoftwelvewhenthevideothat

    wassolicitedbytheGovernmentandorderedbyMr.Vigueclearlyadvertised

    minorsovertheageof12.

    InUnitedStatesv.Cole,61F.3d24(11thCir.1995),theCourtheldthe

    districtcourtsapplicationofthetwolevelenhancementwasclearerrorwhen

    thedefendantrequestedonevideothatspecificallydescribedminorsoverthe

    ageoftwelveandonlysentmoneyforonevideo.

    TheinstantcaseissimilartoColeasMr.Viguespecificallyrequested

    materialthatcontainedminorsovertheageoftwelve.Further,noevidence

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 8 of 11

  • 9

    existsthatMr.Viguehadanyintenttoreceivematerialofminorsundertheage

    oftwelve.

    ThevideoorderedbyMr.Viguewasdescribedasfollows:Thisvideohas

    twoyoungcheerleadersandtwoyoungfootballplayers,allabout12or13years

    old.

    ThereisnoindicationthatMr.Vigueintendedtopossessmaterialsthat

    involvedaminorundertheageof12.Therefore,thisenhancementshouldnot

    apply.

    CONCLUSION

    Basedontheaboveobjections,thisCourtshouldfindaguidelinerangeof

    3037months.Becausethesentencingrangeisbelowthestatutoryminimumof

    fiveyears,thedefenseaskstheCourttoimposeasentenceoffiveyears.

    Thisthe18thdayofJune,2007.

    Respectfully submitted, s/ C. Melissa Owen Bar No. 29803 Attorney for Norman Vigue Tin Fulton Greene & Owen, PLLC 212 South Tryon Street, Suite 1700 Phone: 704-338-1220 Fax: 704-338-1312 E-mail: [email protected]

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 9 of 11

  • 10

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 10 of 1110

    Case 1:O6crOO160LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 10 of 11

  • 11

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I have served the foregoing SENTENCING MEMORANDUM on opposing counsel by submitting a copy through the Electronic Case Filing System, to be sent to:

    Kimlani Ford Assistant United States Attorney 227 West Trade Street Suite 1700 Charlotte, NC 28202 [email protected]

    This the 18th day of June, 2007.

    s/ C.Melissa Owen Bar No. 29803 Attorney for Antonio Briggs Tin Fulton Greene & Owen, PLLC 212 South Tryon Street, Suite 1700 Phone: 704-338-1220 Fax: 704-338-1312 E-mail: [email protected]

    Case 1:06-cr-00160-LHT Document 17 Filed 06/18/07 Page 11 of 11