UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-80180-Cr-CANNON/REINHART

UNITED STATES

Plaintiff

vs.

DOYLE CLEARE, and

HOWARD WRIGHT,

Defendants

/

DEFENDANT WRIGHT’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM AND MOTION FOR 

VARIANCE

1. On March 15, 2023, Howard Wright pled guilty to one count of an eight-count 

Indictment. Count Eight was the only count against Wright and charged illegal re-entry after 

removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(1). The remaining counts concerned Doyle 

Cleare solely. 

2. After a presentence investigation, a final presentence report (“PSR”) was prepared 

and disclosed on May 16, 2023. 

3. On May 17, 2023, the government filed a motion for downward departure 

requesting that the Court grant a one-third (1/3) reduction of the defendant’s sentence for the 

reasons contained in the government’s motion. 

OBJECTIONS

4. There are no objections to the report or the advisory guideline range.

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 1 of 7
2

THE ADVISORY GUIDELINE CALCULATION

5. According to the PSR, Wright has an adjusted offense level of 12 and a criminal 

history category of II. [PSR, ¶ ¶ 16-24; 30]. 

6. Wright is expected to receive a two-level reduction in his offense level for 

acceptance of responsibility thereby reducing his offense level to 10. [PSR, ¶¶ 16-24]. As a result 

of this reduction and a criminal history category of II, Wright faces an advisory guideline 

imprisonment range of 8 to 14 months and removal proceedings once he completes his sentence. 

[PSR, ¶¶ 40; 64]

WRIGHT’S MOTION FOR VARIANCE FROM THE ADVISORY GUIDELINE RANGE 

7. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

8. In determining a reasonable sentence, this Court must not only consider the 

sentencing guidelines but also the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). The factors set forth in 

§3553(a) include:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics 

of the defendant;(2) the need for the sentence imposed--

(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to 

provide just punishment for the offense;(B) to afford adequate deterrence to 

criminal conduct;(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; 

and (D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, 

medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;(3) the 

kinds of sentences available;(4) the advisory guideline range;(5) any pertinent 

policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission;(6) the need to avoid 

unwarranted sentence disparities; and(7) the need to provide restitution to any 

victims of the offense. 

9. Wright’s advisory guideline range, after acceptance of responsibility and before 

consideration of the government’s motion for departure, is 8 to 14 months. 

10. At the time of sentencing on May 30, 2023, Wright will have been in custody for 

7 months.

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 2 of 7
3

11. Wright faces deportation/removal once his sentence is served. [PSR, ¶3;40]

12. Wright will be detained for an uncertain period before he is removed following 

whatever sentence this Court orders.

13. Wright’s candor when questioned after he was apprehended and willingness to 

testify against his co-defendant Doyle Cleare, caused Cleare to enter a plea and not waste judicial 

resources.

WHEREFORE, this Court should grant Wright’s Motion for variance under §3553(a) 

and sentence him to a time-served sentence.

s/JAMES A. SWETZ

James A. Swetz, Esq. (Florida Bar No. 0893668)

Attorney Email Address: jaswetz@jaswetzlaw.com

2312 Wilton Drive, Ste 23

Wilton Manors, Fl. 33305

(Tel.) 954-800-6450

Attorney for Defendant Howard Wright

MEMORANDUM AND ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF A TIME-SERVED SENTENCE

Regardless of the government’s motion for departure requesting that the Court grant 

Wright a one-third reduction in his sentence, there are reasons supporting a variance and a 

sentence less than the advisory guideline sentence of 8 to 14 months. What sentence below the 

advisory guideline range of 8 to 14 months would be reasonable and a sentence not greater than 

necessary to satisfy the sentencing factors under 3553(a)?

Wright recognizes that he has committed a serious offense, faces removal upon 

completion of his sentence, and that the Court must consider the need to deter not only Wright

but others who might be tempted to enter or re-enter the country illegally. However, the need to 

deter Wright and others from committing similar offenses, to provide just punishment and to 

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 3 of 7
4

protect the public, must be balanced against Wright’s history and characteristics, including the 

effort he expended in attempting to save the occupants of the boat.

Wright is a citizen of Jamaica. Jamaica is rife with gang violence and official corruption.

Jamaica Success in Gang Case but Violence Continues (insightcrime.org) ; Panic in Paradise: 

Jamaica’s Battle with Corruption (democratic-erosion.com) As a result of the gang violence 

Wright experienced in Jamaica and his fear that he may become a victim of that violence, Wright 

sought asylum in the United States in 2012. However, the application was denied despite the 

application being detailed, consistent, plausible, and credible. [PSR ¶¶ 37-42]. After being 

removed from this country, Wright eventually fled Jamaica and settled in Cuba.

If it were not for Wright’s actions on the boat, the boat’s occupants may not have 

survived the voyage. According to the investigation and Wright’s statement to authorities, 

Wright traveled to the Bahamas from Cuba. He paid a smuggler in the Bahamas approximately 

$10,000 to be taken to the United States. Before he left the Bahamas for the United States, he 

stayed in “run down houses” in Nassau, Freeport, and Bimini until October 25, 2022, when he 

was taken by boat to another vessel. Wright, together with other migrants, then traveled 

approximately three hours or so before the vessel broke down. According to Wright, his codefendant and captain of the boat, Doyle Cleare, lost the GPS overboard when a wave hit the 

boat. He and Cleare fought because Cleare was doing nothing to help them. Wright was 

particularly concerned with the child on the boat whose only available food was seaweed Wright 

and the others grabbed from the ocean. [PSR ¶ 9] While drifting in the ocean, the vessel began to 

take on water and Wright, to save himself, the child and the other occupants, began to bail water 

from the boat while Cleare went into the cabin refusing to help. The Coast Guard encountered 

the sinking boat by happenstance shortly before it sank. [PSR ¶¶ 4-9]

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 4 of 7
5

At the time of his sentence, Wright will have been incarcerated for approximately seven 

months. Upon his release from federal prison after serving whatever sentence this Court orders, 

Wright faces certain removal from this country. However, his removal will not be immediate. 

Although Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) states the average length of detention 

in an immigration detention center is 63.5 days,

1 it is not unusual for detention to continue for 

months.2 

Wright’s future pre-removal detention will increase the period he will be imprisoned and 

in custody after he serves his sentence in this case. Wright’s future pre-removal detention should 

be considered by this Court in fashioning whatever sentence Wright will face even if the 

government’s departure motion is granted by this Court.

Wright requests this Court to order a time-served sentence so that he may immediately be 

transferred to ICE for detention pending removal. While Wright has previously been convicted 

of illegal re-entry as an aggravated felon, 3 a time-served sentence will not depreciate the 

seriousness of Wright’s offense. Unlike his co-defendant, Wright did not lie to authorities about 

his intention to enter the United States. While the Court has the responsibility in sentencing to 

balance the need to deter the defendant and others who might contemplate an illegal entry or re1 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement FY 2020 Enforcement and Removal Operations 

Report (ice.gov), p.10.

2 Scott v. United States, 16-cv-1618 (August 12, 2019 SDNY), at p. 10. (“Petitioner claims the 

prospect of his deportation should have been considered as a mitigating circumstance because it 

made him ineligible for both the Residential Drug Abuse Program ("RDAP") and a placement in 

a halfway house...He further contends that, after the completion of his sentence, he will likely 

spend six to eight months in a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement holding facility 

awaiting deportation”)

3 The crime for which Wright was originally deported is no longer an aggravated felony. See, 

Government’s Departure Motion, D.E. 46, p.2 N2.

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 5 of 7
6

entry to the United States, Wright’s truthfulness and cooperation counterbalance the need to 

deter. It was Wright’s availability as a witness and candid, truthful cooperation from his initial 

apprehension, which caused his co-defendant to enter a plea and not waste judicial resources on a 

trial. United States v. Stewart, 590 F.3d 93, 141 (2d Cir. 2009) (“The court concluded that this 

cooperation "demonstrates a willingness to help law enforcement and reduces the need for 

rehabilitation and deterrence." ... And of course, use of a defendant's cooperation to justify 

significant variances or departures from the otherwise applicable Guidelines calculations is 

commonplace.”)

For these reasons, Wright requests that the Court sentence him to a time-served sentence.

Respectfully Submitted,

s/JAMES A. SWETZ

James A. Swetz, Esq. (Florida Bar No, 0893668)

Attorney Email Address: jaswetz@jaswetzlaw.com

2312 Wilton Drive, Ste 23

Wilton Manors, Fl. 33305

(Tel.) 954-800-6450

Attorney for Defendant Howard Wright

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 6 of 7
7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, James A. Swetz, Esquire, Attorney for Defendant, hereby certify that I served a copy of 

the foregoing Motion on May 21, 2023 on all counsel of record by electronic delivery using 

CM/ECF. 

Respectfully Submitted,

s/JAMES A. SWETZ

James A. Swetz, Esq. (Florida Bar No, 0893668)

Attorney Email Address: jaswetz@jaswetzlaw.com

2312 Wilton Drive, Ste 23

Wilton Manors, Fl. 33305

(Tel.) 954-800-6450

Attorney for Defendant Howard Wright

Case 9:22-cr-80180-AMC Document 47 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/21/2023 Page 7 of 7