Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Sentencing Memorandum

Sentencing Memorandum

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,045 |Likes:
Published by beaumontenterprise
Calvin Walker was sentenced on Wednesday on a federal misdemeanor charge of not paying his personal income tax in a timely manner.
Calvin Walker was sentenced on Wednesday on a federal misdemeanor charge of not paying his personal income tax in a timely manner.

More info:

Published by: beaumontenterprise on Dec 12, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/12/2012

pdf

text

original

 
1IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXASBEAUMONT
 
DIVISIONUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,v.CALVIN WALKER §§§§§Crim. Action No. 1:11-CR-67JUDGE RON CLARK 
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
The probation officer in this case submitted a carefully prepared Presentence InvestigationReport.
See
Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(1). As required by Rule 32, the Report in this case sets out certaincategories of information to aid the court in determining the sentence, such as the offense level, thecriminal history category, calculation of the guideline range, factors relevant to determining anappropriate sentence within the guideline range, and possible grounds for departure. The PresentenceInvestigation Report is intended to aid the court. The probation officer attempts to provide the courtwith a neutral evaluation of the factors that affect the court’s determination of a sentence.Once the Report is filed, either party may object to “material information, sentencingguideline ranges, and policy statements contained in or omitted from the report.” Fed. R. Crim. P.32(f)(1). Objections to the exact wording of paragraphs in the Report that do not affect the criminalhistory category, the offense level, grounds for departure, policy statements, or determination of thesentence are generally not material, and a ruling is unnecessary.Mr. Walker filed eight objections to the Presentence Investigation Report, several of whichwere later agreed to by the parties. For the reasons discussed on the record at the December 12, 2012sentencing hearing, the court finds that a determination of those objections which remain outstandingis unnecessary because they do not affect the sentencing. The court is not inclined to require a
Case 1:11-cr-00067-RC-KFG Document 169 Filed 12/12/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 3816
 
2 probation officer, already burdened with many other reports and responsibilities, to rewrite a report because the parties were not happy with the semantic nuances of the phrasing. Therefore, it isordered that the court will accept the November 20, 2012 revision of the Report as written. The courtasks the probation officer to attach a copy of the parties’ letter agreement as to the phrasing of certain paragraphs, which was discussed at the December 12, 2012 sentencing, to the November 20, 2012revised Report.The Government filed a sentencing memorandum requesting that the court impose a term of five years probation, and impose certain conditions:1.That Mr. Walker refrain from performing services for, or in connection with, publiccontracts from any public entity which receives taxpayer funds as its major source or revenue, or, in the alternative, from performing services for, or in connection with,any public contracts in any manner from the Beaumont Independent School Districtand the City of Port Arthur;2.That Mr. Walker perform 400 hours of community service; and3.That Mr. Walker file all applicable federal and state tax returns, pay any tax due, andretain a CPA to prepare and file any returns while under probation or supervision.Doc. # 167 at 1-2.With respect to condition (1), this was not suggested in the Presentence Investigation Reportand Mr. Walker objected to this condition. At the December 12, 2012 sentencing hearing, the courtanalyzed on the record the applicable provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines and the casesdiscussing the barring of a defendant from certain types of employment, including the cases cited by the Government. The court relies on that analysis, and additionally notes the following .The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 authorizes the court to order as a conditionof probation that a defendant “refrain . . . from engaging in a specified occupation, business, or 
Case 1:11-cr-00067-RC-KFG Document 169 Filed 12/12/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 3817
 
3 profession bearing a
reasonably direct relationship to the conduct constituting the offense
. . . .” 18U.S.C. § 3563(b)(5) (emphasis added). Similarly, the Sentencing Guidelines provide that the courtmay impose a condition of probation or supervised release prohibiting outright or limiting the termson which a defendant may engage in a specified occupation, business, or profession
only
if itdetermines that “a reasonably
direct 
relationship existed between the defendant’s occupation, business, or profession and the conduct relevant to the
offense of conviction
.” U.S. SentencingGuidelines Manual § 5F1.5(a)(1) (2002) (emphasis added).In this case, the Government argues that the conduct underlying the original indictment—i.e.,alleged fraud on the Beaumont Independent School District (“BISD”)—justifies an order forbiddingMr. Walker from performing services for, or in connection with, any public contracts from BISD andthe City of Port Arthur. But in the plea agreement, the Government agreed to dismiss all 37 of thefraud counts on which Mr. Walker was indicted. The probation officer included some informationon the allegations underlying the original Indictment, but that was under a heading of “OffenseBehavior Not Part of Relevant Conduct.” The Government did not object to that categorization.Mr. Walker instead pled to a one count information that he willfully failed to pay income tax.This is the only count on which Mr. Walker was convicted. A willful failure to pay taxes is notdirectly related to his work as an electrical contractor. Barring Mr. Walker from working for publicentities makes it no more nor less likely that he will pay his taxes promptly and in full.
Case 1:11-cr-00067-RC-KFG Document 169 Filed 12/12/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 3818

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->