Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Defendant, Jason Lee Bowers, through counsel, hereby submits this memorandum for
the Court’s consideration at sentencing. Mr. Bowers reserves the right to present additional
witness statements and testimony at the sentencing hearing presently scheduled for July 8,
2010.
CONTENTS
U.S.C. Sections 2113(a) and (d)(armed bank robbery) in counts 1, 3, 5, and 7, and violations
of 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c) (possession of a firearm in furtherance of and use and carry in
relation to a crime of violence) in counts 2, 4, 5 and 8. Jury trial commenced on March 8, 2010
Case 4:09-cr-00188-RP-RAW Document 65 Filed 06/11/10 Page 2 of 7
and on March 10, 2010 the jury found Mr. Bowers guilty on all counts 1 and 2. Additional facts
relevant to Mr. Bowers’ objections to the presentence report and for a sentence below the
range recommended in the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines appear in the body
The draft presentence report correctly does not apply the 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(C)(ii)
enhanced sentences for a second and subsequent conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). In its
response to the presentence report, however, the government argues that Mr. Bowers should receive
consecutive sentences of seven, 25, 25 and 25 years incarceration on counts two, four, six and eight.
Section 924(c)(1)(C)(I) provides that, “[i]n the case of a second or subsequent conviction
under this subsection, the person shall . . .be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than
25 years.” It is correct that in Deal v. United States, 508 U.S. 129 (1993), the Supreme Court held
that application of the enhancement does not require a final conviction to render other convictions
in the same prosecution “second or subsequent.” A finding of guilt on count two, for example,
precedes (even if only by moments) a finding of guilt on count four. Thus, the conviction of count
The recent decision of the Court in United States v. O’Brien,--- S.Ct. ----, 2010 WL
2025204, U.S., May 24, 2010 (NO. 08-1569), however, raises a separate issue. In O’Brien the
Court employed the five-step test of Castillo v. United States, 530 U.S. 120 (2000) and
for use of a machine gun, is an element of the offense, and not a sentencing factor. Thus, it
must be charged in the indictment and found by a jury beyond reasonable doubt.
Mr. Bowers believes that the O’Brien reasoning applies equally to § 924(c)(1)(C)(ii).
He was not indicted under that section for having a second or subsequent conviction and,
other than entering verdicts on each of the charged § 924(c) counts, the jury did not make a
§ 924(c)(1)(C)(ii) finding.
upon a prior conviction. The second Castillo factor in determining whether a factor is an
element or a sentencing factor is legal tradition and past congressional practice. The Court
characteristics of the offender,” and specifically mentions recidivism. O’Brien, slip op. at
8.
While, at first glance, the fact that Mr. Bowers has multiple convictions of the same
offense, it does not fit within this rationale. Multiple convictions under § 924(c) in the same
charging document have nothing to do with recidivism. The Oxford English Dictionary
defines “recidivate” as “[t]o fall back, relapse; to backslide” and “to relapse into crime, to
reoffend.” These definitions apply to an individual who is convicted of an offense and then
relapses into crime, not to a defendant who commits similar multiple acts in the period of
several days, all prior to his arrest. Mr. Bowers’ four uses of firearms in furtherance of four
bank robberies go to the nature of the offense more than the characteristics of the offender.
sentencing factor.
On January 12, 2005 the United States Supreme Court published an opinion in United
States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct.738 (2005), in which a majority of the Court held that, because
the application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines in certain cases violates the Sixth
are binding on the sentencing court, the Guidelines are now advisory and not mandatory. The
Court’s task following Booker is to find a sentence that is sufficient, but not greater than
Among the important factors in sentencing are the “history and characteristics of the
defendant,” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) Mr. Bowers’ history is of an individual who spent his
first 22 years consumed by his addictions. His first exposure to controlled substances was
at the age of five, when his teenaged uncle introduced him to what appears to have been
marijuana. At the age of 12, he was abusing marijuana and, especially, alcohol. A year later,
a 16-year old girl introduced him to methamphetamine. According to Mr. Bowers, it “was
like finding my long lost twin, I felt as if a missing half of me had been put back and from
now on I knew what I wanted to do my life, crank and everything it took to get it, have it and
keep getting it. While living with my mom in Carlisle, Iowa I used LSD for the first time, I
liked it but I only did it once in a while because meth was all I really needed.”
4
Case 4:09-cr-00188-RP-RAW Document 65 Filed 06/11/10 Page 5 of 7
Mr. Bowers’ drug use continued to escalate during his teens. By the age of 18, he was
carrying a half-ounce of methamphetamine with him at all times, to assure that he had a two-
day supply on hand if necessary. Mr. Bowers abandoned every other aspect of his life,
including school, in pursuit of his addiction. His addiction was creating many relatively
June 18, 1999 was a very significant date in his life, as this was the date that Mr.
Bowers apparently made the conscious decision to straighten himself out. According to his
account, Mr. Bowers pursued his recovery with vigor, especially over the three years that
followed. During most of the last decade, Mr. Bowers was able to create for himself a decent
Beginning in Summer, 2008, Mr. Bowers gradually began slipping back into his old
habits. By October of that year, his methamphetamine addiction had returned to haunt him
full-bore. In the year leading to the events that are the subjects of this prosecution, Mr.
Bowers lost everything he had gained for himself over the previous eight years.
request of the defense, by Dr. Terry Davis, an Omaha, Nebraska psychiatrist. The report
confirms that Mr. Bowers suffers from amphetamine dependence and a history of
polysubstance abuse. There may ultimately be some discrepancy between his representation
to the F.B.I. after his arrest that he was abstaining from drug use during the charged offenses
5
Case 4:09-cr-00188-RP-RAW Document 65 Filed 06/11/10 Page 6 of 7
and some evidence that he continued to use during the period of the charged offenses.1 The
psychiatrist concluded, however, that “[i]n either event, it is my opinion that his chronic,
heavy use of methamphetamine during September and October of 2009 most likely clouded
his judgment and diminished his capacity to the point that his ability to fully understand and
appreciate the consequences of his actions at the time of the alleged offenses was
significantly impaired. . . While his Amphetamine Dependence certainly does not excuse his
behavior, it appears that ‘but for’ his drug use, the alleged offenses most likely would not
have occurred. Again, that does not excuse his behavior and does not meet the definition of
‘insanity,’ but it does indicate that his actions, as well as his judgment and mental capacity,
Dr. Davis also concluded that Mr. Bowers’ conviction makes him likely to engage in
924(c), the psychiatrist’s conclusions would provide support for an argument under 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) for a sentence substantially below that set out in the advisory sentencing
guidelines, or perhaps a formal departure from the guideline range. U.S.S.G. § 5K2.13.
Mr. Bowers’ life history is that of an individual who spent many years of his life
consumed by his addictions, but then was able to carve out a long period of recovery. The
1
The latter suggestion is bolstered by Mr. Bowers’ appearance in the days following his arrest, of
being an individual who was still coming down from intense drug use.
6
Case 4:09-cr-00188-RP-RAW Document 65 Filed 06/11/10 Page 7 of 7
final year before his arrest was marred by a major relapse which has put him in the position
B. John Burns
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
Copies to:
Deb Scorpiniti
United States Attorney’s Office
U.S. Courthouse Annex, Suite 286
110 East Court Avenue
Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2053
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on June 11, 2010, I electronically
filed this document with the Clerk of Court using the
ECF system which will serve it on the appropriate
parties.
/s/ B. John Burns
John Burns