Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, CASE NO. 15-CR-20126-001

 vs. HON. ARTHUR J. TARNOW

FADI HASSAN HAMMOUD,

Defendant.

______________________________/

DEFENDANT, FADI HASSAN HAMMOUD’S,

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

NOW COMES, Defendant, FADI HASSAN HAMMOUD, by and through his 

counsel, James C. Thomas of JAMES C. THOMAS, P.C., and files the following 

Sentencing Memorandum setting forth all factors that this Honorable Court should consider 

in determining the type and length of sentence for Fadi Hassan Hammoud (“Mr. 

Hammoud”), and requesting a downward variance from the sentencing guidelines.

I. COMPUTATION OF GUIDELINES

On March 5, 2015, Mr. Hammoud was named in a five-count Indictment charging 

Count 1: Bank Fraud in violation of 18 USC § 1344. Count II through Count IV: Mail 

Fraud in violation of 18 USC § 1341 and Count V: Aggravated Identity Theft in violation 

of 18 USC § 1028A(a)(i). The Indictment also included forfeiture allegations, pursuant to 

18 USC § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 USC § 2461(c). The offenses were alleged to have occurred 

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.105 Page 1 of 10
Page 2 of 10

between August 2011 through March 2013. On January 5, 2017 Mr. Hammoud entered a 

plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment pursuant to a Rule 11 Plea Agreement.

The guidelines for violation of 18 USC § 1344 offenses are found in USSG §

2B1.1(a)(1) requiring a base offense level of 7. Mr. Hammoud received a fourteen-level 

increase pursuant to USSG § 2B1.1(b)(1)(H), because the loss in this offense was in excess 

of $550,000.00. Additionally, he received a two-level increase pursuant to USSG § 

2B1.1(b)(11)(A)(ii) because the offense involved an authentication feature. 

Mr. Hammoud received a three-level total reduction for acceptance of responsibility 

pursuant to USSG §§ 3E1.1(a) and (b). As a result, Mr. Hammoud’s Total Offense Level 

is 20. Based upon a criminal history score of two, he has a criminal history category of II 

his advisory guidelines range is calculated to be 37 to 46 months. Defendant’s correct 

criminal history increases the guidelines range contemplated in the Rule 11 from 33 to 41 

to 37 to 46. While it is believed that Defendant’s misdemeanor history overstates his 

criminality, there are no disputes regarding the calculation of the guidelines range in the 

Rule 11 Plea Agreement or in the report by Probation.

II. RULE 11 PLEA AGREEMENT

On January 5, 2015, Mr. Hammoud entered a plea of guilty pursuant to a Rule 11 

Plea Agreement. Mr. and Mrs. Hammoud have agreed to fund the restitution amount 

partially by a repurchase of his home at 7601 Miller Road for $234,000.00. In this way the 

familial home will be exempted from forfeiture/restitution. Towards that end, the details 

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.106 Page 2 of 10
Page 3 of 10

are near completed and the Court will be advised at the time of the sentencing regarding 

this issue. 

III. REQUEST FOR DOWNWARD VARIANCE FROM ADVISORY 

GUIDELINES

Until 2005, a defendant was precluded from arguing a variance outside the express 

terms of a Rule 11 Plea Agreement. United States v. Williams, 510 E.3d 416, 435 (3rd. 

Cir. 2007). That is not true today. Upon review of the United States Sentencing Guidelines 

Commission statistics, both nationally and for the Eastern District of Michigan, it appears 

as if judges have been more willing to exercise their discretion and vary from the guidelines 

to impose a sentence below the recommended guidelines. We ask this Honorable Court to 

do so here.

Counsel submits that a term of incarceration under the particular facts and 

circumstances of this case is greater than necessary to achieve the stated goals of sentencing

18 USC § 3553(a)(2). In 2003 Justice Anthony Kennedy stated, “Our resources are 

misspent, our punishments too severe; our sentences too long . . . the sentencing guidelines 

are responsible in part for the increased terms [and they] should be revised downward.”1 

Ten years later, United States Attorney General Eric Holder echoed Justice Kennedy in his 

own speech to the ABA, saying “too many Americans go to too many prisons for far too 

long, and for no truly good law enforcement reason. . . .”2 Counsel attended a sentencing 

 

1 http://www.abanow.org/2003/08/speech-by-justice-anthony-kennedy-at-aba-annualmeeting/

2 http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2013/ag-speech-130812.html

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.107 Page 3 of 10
Page 4 of 10

at WSU Law School where the question was posed to the Honorable Jed Rakoff and Nancy 

Edmunds “How Much Time was Too Much Time?” This issue is still looming. Prison 

populations continue to be burdened by sentences too long for their purposes. Recognizing 

the purposes of sentencing are restriction, deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation. 

U.S. v. Pressley, 547 F.3rd. (6th Cir 2008). Mr. Hammoud’s circumstance is one that 

warrants the consideration of this Honorable Court. Counsel submits that this Honorable 

Court should grant a downward variance for the reasons stated above and after application 

of the relevant sentencing factors.

IV. APPLICATION OF THE 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) FACTORS

18 USC § 3553(a)(1): Nature and Circumstances of the Offense and Fadi 

Hammoud’s History and Characteristics

Mr. Hammoud is a forty-six-year-old father of five. He was born in Lebanon and 

immigrated to the U.S. during the war. Both parents are deceased. He has twelve surviving 

siblings. He married Maya Makhzoum in September 2014 after a bitterly contested and 

devastating divorce with his first wife. The letters submitted in support of Mr. Hammoud

show that he is a devout man, who is fully supported emotionally and financially by his 

family. Not only does hisfamily stand beside him, but he enjoys the unwavering dedication 

of his wife with whom he has two young children and is now expecting a third. He has 

maintained a close relationship with the children of his first marriage who wants to go to 

medical school. His son, Hassan, speaks of his bond with his father along with his hard 

work and family values. This support should be considered by this Honorable Court, as 

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.108 Page 4 of 10
Page 5 of 10

evidence suggests familial support is a significant factor in lower recidivism. See Shirley 

R. Klein et. al., Inmate Family Functioning, 46 Int’l J. Offender Therapy & Comp. 

Criminology 95, 99-100 (2002) (“The relationship between family ties and lower 

recidivism has been consistent across study populations, different periods, and different 

methodological procedures.”)

Mr. Hammoud is also known to be a charitable man (not so much in money, but of 

his time). In addition to working to rebuild a new life for his family, he has a history of 

giving his time and energy to others that are more needy than himself. His CPA, Carl Masi,

describes how Mr. Hammoud has opened his doors to take disenfranchised in his culture 

to help them better adopt to their new surroundings. The Court may consider Mr. 

Hammoud’s character, as reflected in the letters by those who know him, and his charitable

good works. See Unites States v. Wachowiak, 412 F.Supp.2d 958 (E.D. Wisc. 2006) aff’d 

496 F.3d 744 (7th Cir. 2007) (“The guidelines failed to consider defendant’s otherwise 

outstanding character, as depicted in the many supportive letters... while essentially §

3553(a)(1) requires the court to consider the character of the defendant, the guidelines 

account only for criminal history. 

18 USC § 3553(a)(2)(A): The Requirement that the Sentence Imposed Reflect the 

Seriousness of the Offense, Promote Respect for the Law and Provide Just 

Punishment for the Offense

Mr. Hammoud is fully aware that this is a serious crime, and he must face the 

consequences of his actions. Because of his shame he has shielded many family and friends 

from the instant matter for a long period. As are reflected by his letters of support he has 

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.109 Page 5 of 10
Page 6 of 10

made his family aware. The letter of his wife, Maya, and sister, Fadia Moussa, point out 

the devotion of how he has dealt with the strain of the charges. However, it is well known 

that a felony conviction wreaks havoc on a person’s life. United States v. Wulff, 758 F.2d 

1121, 1125 (6th Cir. 1985) (“a felony conviction irreparably damages one’s reputation.”) 

See generally United States v. Leon, 341 F.3d 928, 929 (9th Cir. 2003); United States v. 

Aguirre, 214 F.3d 1122, 1123 (9th Cir. 2000). The collateral consequences of Mr. 

Hammoud’s conduct, and resulting guilty plea, to a large extent reflect the seriousness of 

the offense and provide punishment. He has been under indictment for years now. He has 

consented to significant forfeitures and restitution in this case. He has taken earnest steps 

to pay his obligation. His reputation has been stained in his community, and his family has 

spent over two years awaiting the ultimate disposition in this matter. 

18 USC § 3553(a)(2)(B): Deter Criminal Conduct

It is proper for a sentencing court to vary from the guidelines based upon evidence 

of a substantial likelihood that a defendant will successfully overcome the cause of the 

criminal behavior being punished. See United States v. Davis, 763 F.Supp. 645, 652 (D.C. 

Cir. 1991). Since this offense, Mr. Hammoud has gained a very real understanding of the 

jeopardy he has placed himself under. He has risked the marriage, the safety of his wife 

and put himself in the position of disappointing her by his absence, when she needs him 

most. She is invested in a gas station in Detroit and is in the process of obtaining another. 

She is now facing the real possibility of managing a business along with three children 

because of the very real possibility of his incarceration.

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.110 Page 6 of 10
Page 7 of 10

18 USC § 3553(a)(2)(C): Protect the Public From Further Crimes of the Defendant

Post Booker and FanFan cases have reiterated that incarceration is not always 

necessary to protect the public. See United States v. Edwards, 595 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 

2010); Unite States v. Baker, 502 F.3d 465 (6th Cir. 2007); Unites States v. Stall, 581 F.3d 

276 (6th Cir. 2009) (where variances that did not provide for incarceration were held not 

to be unreasonable). As noted in the PSIR, Mr. Hammoud does not have a history of 

felonious conduct. The assault charges in 2007 and 2013 place him in a criminal history 

category of II. Both of these cases included successful probationary periods with

advisement dismissals. While they are appropriately included for guidelines calculation 

counsel submits they overstate prior criminal conduct. Counsel submits that incarceration 

is not necessary to protect the public from Mr. Hammoud.

18 USC § 3553(a)(2)(D): Provide the Defendant with Needed Educational or 

Vocational Training, Medical Care or Other Correctional Treatment in the Most 

Effective Manner

Mr. Hammoud would like to continue to be involved in real estate in some way. His 

wife independently has significant funds and with his input has been buying and selling 

commercial and residential real estate. Upon release he would like to do more and it will 

not require licensure. It is expected that because of his felony conviction he will have great 

difficulty or be precluded from being involved in mortgage brokerage or real estate 

brokerage/sales licensing. This would probably be the most viable for Defendant to gather 

sufficient funds for restitution and start to rebuild a life for himself and his family.

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.111 Page 7 of 10
Page 8 of 10

18 USC § 3553(a)(3) and (4): Kinds of Sentences Available and the Sentencing 

Range Established By the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Mr. Hammoud’s advisory sentencing guideline range is 37 to 46 months. Without

a variance, this Honorable Court may sentence Mr. Hammoud to (1) a sentence of 

imprisonment; or (2) a sentence of imprisonment that includes a term of supervised release 

with a condition that substitutes community confinement or home detention according to 

the schedule in subsection (e), provided that at least one-half of the minimum term is 

satisfied by imprisonment. USSG § 5C1.1(d).

There is no statutory mandatory minimum term of incarceration in this case; 

therefore, if this Honorable Court finds it appropriate, it may vary from the guidelines and 

impose a sentence that does not require incarceration.

18 USC § 3553(a)(5): Any Pertinent Policy Statement Issued by the Sentencing 

Commission

Counsel is not aware of any relevant policy statements.

18 USC § 3553(a)(6): The Need to Avoid Unwarranted Sentence Disparities Among 

Defendants with Similar Records Who Have Been Found Guilty of Similar Conduct

There are no codefendants in this matter. Mr. Mukhtal has not been listed as a 

codefendant in this matter. 

18 USC § 3553(a)(7): The Need to Provide Restitution to Any Victims

Counsel adopts the position of probation in paragraph 83 of the PSIR. Mr. 

Hammoud would like to buy and sell real estate. To do so this may require funding from 

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.112 Page 8 of 10
Page 9 of 10

traditional sources as well as hard money lenders if necessary. The only exception,

therefore, would be to allow financing in the ordinary course of business upon presentation 

of documentation to probation or to his supervised release officer.

V. CONCLUSION

“The makers of the sentencing guidelines have succeeded only in contributing to 

the making of law of punishment that shows obstinately little concern for the personhood 

of offenders . . . a law that tends to treat offenders as something closer to animals than 

humans, and that has correspondingly sought, more and more frequently, simply to lock 

them away.” See James Q. Whitman, Harsh Justice, Oxford Press, 2003 at 223 note 72.

Given the foregoing facts and circumstances, defense counsel requests this 

Honorable Court to vary downward from the guidelines and fashion a sentence for Fadi 

Hammoud that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary to satisfy the requirements of 

18 USC § 3553(a).

Respectfully Submitted,

JAMES C. THOMAS, P.C.

By: /S/ James C. Thomas 

James C. Thomas P23801

Counsel for Defendant, Fadi Hammoud

12900 Hall Road, Suite 350

Sterling Heights, MI 48313

jthomas@orlaw.com

DATED: May 15, 2017

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.113 Page 9 of 10
Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 15, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing paper 

with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send notification of 

such filing to all parties of record.

 /S/ James C. Thomas

James C. Thomas

Case 2:15-cr-20126-AJT-APP ECF No. 26 filed 05/15/17 PageID.114 Page 10 of 10