UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

EDDIE JONES

No. 20 CR 281

Judge Manish S. Shah

GOVERNMENT’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, by its attorney, JOHN R. LAUSCH, JR., 

United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, respectfully submits this 

sentencing memorandum with respect to defendant Eddie Jones. For the reasons set 

forth below, a sentence at the high end of the Guidelines range of 78 to 97 months, is 

warranted and sufficient, but not greater than necessary, upon consideration of the 

relevant sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). 

I. Background

On September 22, 2020, the grand jury returned an indictment charging the 

defendant, Eddie Jones, with being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 

Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(1). Dkt. 1. On April 20, 2021, defendant

pled guilty to the indictment. Dkt. 32. Defendant is scheduled to be sentenced by 

this Court on August 25, 2021, at 1:30 p.m. Dkt. 32.

II. Offense Conduct 

On or about June 5, 2020, at Chicago, in the Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division, defendant, knowing that he had previously been convicted of a 

crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year, did knowingly 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:133
2

possess, in and affecting interstate commerce, a firearm, namely a loaded Smith & 

Wesson M&P 9 Shield, 9 millimeter pistol, bearing serial number HLF7788, which 

firearm had traveled in interstate commerce prior to the defendant’s possession of 

the firearm, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(1). Plea 

Declaration, at 1-2.

On June 5, 2020, at approximately 3:08 p.m., Chicago Police Department 

officers were speaking with a citizen on the 3400 block of West Iowa Street when 

they heard 5-7 gunshots just south of their location. PSR, at ¶6. The officers ran 

toward the area and observed defendant running northbound on Homan Avenue 

and then east on Rice Street. Id. The officers pursued defendant and came face-toface with defendant in the alley east of Homan Avenue. Id. An officer observed 

Jones holding a firearm in his hand and observed the defendant toss the firearm 

into a vacant lot. Id. After another brief chase, the defendant was apprehended and 

the firearm was recovered. Id. The recovered firearm was a Smith & Wesson, M&P 

Shield 9 mm pistol, bearing serial number HLF7788. Id. The firearm had a laser 

scope, was loaded with one round in the chamber, and had live rounds in the 

firearm magazine. Id.

Relevant Conduct: Shooting of Three Victims

Immediately prior to his arrest in this case, defendant used the Smith & 

Wesson in the attempted murder of Victims A, B and C. PSR, at ¶24.

A. Shooting Victims

On June 5, 2020, at approximately 3:08 p.m., Victims A-C were shot at 814 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:134
3

North Homan Avenue, in Chicago, IL. PSR, at ¶7.

Victim A had six gunshot wounds in his thighs, legs and knee. PSR, at ¶9.

While he was being treated by paramedics, a bullet fell out of Gaiter’s leg wound 

(“Bullet A”). Id. Victim A was transferred to Stroger Hospital for surgery in 

response to his serious injuries. Id. A treating physician at Stroger found a fracture 

in Victim A’ femur, caused by the bullet and “extensive retained metallic bullet 

fragments with posttraumatic inflammation/hemorrhage, and subcutaneous gas 

along the bullet track.” Id. The doctor also found a bullet still in Gaiter’s right knee. 

Id., at 76. On June 6, a doctor found that “urgent surgery” was needed to “stabilize 

bone, improve stability and minimize morbidity.” GV, Ex. K, at 90; PSR, at ¶9.

During surgery, the doctors made an incision in Victim A’ patellar tendon, and 

inserted a 400mm nail, affixed with multiple screws drilled into Victim A’ leg. Id.

Victim A was hospitalized for nine days. GV, Ex. K, at 177.

Victim B had a gunshot wound in his lower left leg and was transferred to 

Stroger Hospital for his injuries. PSR, at ¶10. Victim B had a fracture in his left 

tibia and was hospitalized for three days. Id., Victim B underwent surgery and had 

an intramedullary nail inserted in his tibia. Id. 

Victim C had a gunshot graze wound on his left hip and was treated at the 

scene. PSR, at ¶8.

B. Pod Camera Footage Captured Jones Approaching the Site of the 

Shooting 18 Seconds Before the Shooting; Fleeing Immediately 

After the Shooting

A pod camera set up on the corner of Chicago Avenue and Homan Avenue 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:135
4

captured the defendant, wearing a red shirt, walking south on Homan, then walk 

westbound across Homan, to where the shooting victims were standing. PSR, at 

¶13. Approximately nine seconds later, Jones walks out of the area where the 

shooting victims were located and met with a man by a car just east of the shooting 

location. Id. Nine seconds later, Jones and the other man ran to the area of the 

shooting and the shooting occurred. Id. After the shooting, the pod camera shows 

Jones running northbound up Homan Avenue, then cutting east on Rice Street. Id.

Defendant was apprehended by CPD officers fleeing from the scene of the shooting. 

Id.

C. Forensic Evidence Matching Recovered Shell Casings and Bullet to 

Jones’ Firearm.

CPD recovered seven spent shell casings from the scene of the shooting. PSR, at 

¶15. The CPD Forensic Firearms Lab compared the shell casings to test cartridges 

from the recovered firearm. Id. The CPD Forensic Firearms Lab concluded that 

four of the casings recovered from the scene of the shooting were fired from the 

firearm recovered from the defendant. Id.

A Forensic Scientist from the Illinois State Police Forensic Center examined the 

bullet recovered from Victim A’ leg (“Bullet A”) and determined that the recovered 

bullet was fired by the gun recovered from the defendant.1 Id.

D. Eyewitness Statement

Witness A resides on the 800 block of North Homan Avenue, the location of the 

1 Officers also administered a gunshot residue test on defendant’s hands. The test was unable to detect gunshot 

residue after defendant led officers on a chase and was detained by officers.

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:136
5

shooting. PSR, at ¶17. Witness A spoke to investigating detectives at the 11th

District and related that she looked out the window when she heard gunshots. Id. 

Witness A saw a man matching Defendant’s’ appearance (namely, a bald male black 

in his late 20’s wearing a red shirt) firing a black semi-automatic handgun with his 

right hand. Id. She then saw the man flee northbound. Id. After leaving her house, 

she saw the man who had fired the firearm being taken into police custody.2 Id.

III. Offense Calculation and Guidelines Range

A. PSR Calculation of Offense Level

Pursuant to the November 2018 Sentencing Guidelines Manual, the PSR 

calculates the total offense level as follows (PSR ¶¶23-33):

20 Offense Base Level pursuant to USSG 

§ 2K2.1(a)(4)(A), because defendant committed 

offense after sustaining felony conviction for 

aggravated vehicle hijacking while armed with a 

firearm.

+4 “In Connection With” Felony. pursuant to USSG 

§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because defendant used firearm in 

connection with another felony offense, namely 

attempted murder and aggravated discharge of a 

firearm.

24 Preliminary Offense Level

27 Adjusted Offense Level for Connection to 

Attempted Second-Degree Murder. Pursuant to 

USSG § 2A2.1(a)(2) and 2X1.1(a), the offense level is 

27 because the defendant’s conduct involved the 

shooting of three individuals that constitutes 

attempted commission of second-degree murder. 

+2 Serious Bodily Injury. Pursuant to USSG § 

2A2.2(b)(1)(B) and 1B1.1 App. Note 1(M), because the 

victims sustained injuries that required surgery and 

2 Officers reported that in a separate canvassing interview of Witness A and her neighbors, Witness A (along with 

the other neighbors and victims) denied seeing the identity of the shooter. However, in a more comprehensive 

interview conducted at police headquarters, Witness A described how she witnessed the shooting and described the 

shooter as matching the appearance of the defendant. 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:137
6

hospitalization.

-3 Acceptance of Responsibility. USSG § E1.1(a); 

E1.1(b)

26 Total Offense Level 

The government agrees with the PSR’s calculation of the offense level.

B. Criminal History

Probation and the government agree that the defendant’s criminal history

score is 5 and his criminal history category is III. PSR at ¶43.

On or about December 9, 2010, defendant was adjudicated delinquent for 

battery, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, and was sentenced to 18 

months’ imprisonment. Pursuant to Guideline § 4A1.2(e)(4) and 4A1.2(d)(2)(B), 

defendant receives no criminal history points for this conviction. PSR at ¶41.

On or about May 22, 2013, defendant was convicted of aggravated vehicle 

hijacking with a firearm, armed robbery, and aggravated unlawful restraint in the 

Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, and was sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment. 

Pursuant to Guideline § 4A1.1(a), defendant receives 3 criminal history points for this 

conviction. PSR at ¶41.

On or about June 3, 2019, defendant was convicted of retail theft in the Circuit 

Court of Cook County, Illinois, and was sentenced to 60 days’ imprisonment. 

Pursuant to Guideline § 4A1.1(b), defendant receives 2 criminal history points for this 

conviction. PSR at ¶42.

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:138
7

C. Advisory Guidelines Range

The government agrees with the PSR’s calculation of the defendant’s advisory 

guidelines range as being 78 to 97 months. PSR at ¶85. 

IV. The §3553(a) Factors Support Imposition of a Sentence of 

Imprisonment at the High End of the 78 to 97 Month Guidelines Range.

Section 3553(a) requires the Court to impose a sentence that is “sufficient, but 

not greater than necessary,” to comply with the purposes of sentencing.3 In order to 

determine the sentence to impose, the court must consider the statutory factors listed 

in §3553(a)(1)-(7). One of those factors is the advisory range set by the Sentencing 

Guidelines, and another is the Commission’s policy statements. §3553(a)(4), (a)(5). 

Although the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only, “[a]s a matter of 

administration and to secure nationwide consistency, the Guidelines should be the 

starting point and the initial benchmark.” Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49 

(2007). For the reasons set forth below, the statutory sentencing factors reflect that 

a sentence at the high end of the Guidelines range of 37 to 46 months is warranted. 

A. Seriousness, Nature and Circumstances of Offense

The seriousness, nature and circumstances of the offense demonstrate that a

Guidelines sentence is warranted. Defendant, a convicted felon, was walking through 

3Those purposes are the need for the sentence “(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.” § 3553(a)(2)(A)-

(D). 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:139
8

the streets of Chicago with a loaded Smith & Wesson pistol with a laser sight. 

Defendant used this firearm in the attempted murder of three men standing on a 

residential street. Two of the victims were hospitalized and had to undergo surgery. 

One of the victims was shot six times in the thighs, leg and knee. Defendant then 

fled, with the loaded gun, through a residential neighborhood, pursued by police.

B. History and Characteristics of Defendant

A high-end Guidelines sentence is warranted and consistent with the history 

and characteristics of the defendant. Defendant already has previous convictions for 

aggravated vehicle hijacking with a firearm, armed robbery, and aggravated 

unlawful restraint. PSR at ¶41. Defendant was discharged from parole for these 

offenses less than three months before his actions in this case. Id.

Defendant was also adjudicated delinquent after he battered and robbed a 

blind man, an event that is not accounted for in the calculation of defendant’s criminal 

history. PSR at ¶40.

C. The Need to Protect the Public and Afford Adequate Deterrence and 

Respect for the Law

The sentence imposed should have specific and general deterrent effects. See

18 U.S.C. ' 3553(a)(2)(B); United States v. Mendoza, 576 F.3d 711, 722 (7th Cir. 2009) 

(noting that general deterrence is a factor to consider). A high-end Guidelines 

sentence of incarceration would protect the community from the defendant’s violent 

actions.

Defendant’s previous sentences of 12 years’ incarceration did not deter 

defendant from possessing a gun and using it to shoot at victims in the street. If 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:140
9

anything, defendant’s violent conduct has escalated in the wake of his previous term 

of imprisonment. A high-end Guidelines sentence would protect the community from 

defendant’s violent and life-threatening behavior.

It is also important to stress the need for general deterrence. Over the past 

year, the Chicagoland area has been subjected to devastating firearm violence. 

The consistent application of federal law meant to curb this violence by preventing 

felons, and other prohibited persons from possessing and using firearms, is 

necessary to deter this violence. A high-end Guidelines sentence would send the 

message that violent behavior like that committed by the defendant is behavior that

will not be tolerated by the federal government.

V. SUPERVISED RELEASE

The government recommends that the Court impose a guideline period of 

supervised release between one and three years. See PSR ¶ 88. During that period, 

the government recommends that the Court impose the following conditions:

A. Mandatory Conditions, Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) 

• The defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime.

• The defendant shall not unlawfully possess a controlled substance.

• The defendant shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled 

substance AND submit to one drug test within 15 days of release on 

probation and at least two periodic tests thereafter, up to 104 periodic 

tests, during each year of supervised release for use of a controlled 

substance.

• The defendant shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample from 

the defendant at the direction of the United States Probation Office.

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:141
10

B. Discretionary Conditions, Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(d) and 

3563(b)

The following conditions should be imposed on the basis that they (1) facilitate 

supervision by the probation officer, which is important here to promote defendant’s 

respect for the law and deter the defendant from future crimes; and (2) are tailored 

to address mental health and substance abuse issues which, if left untreated, will 

prevent defendant from successfully reintegrating into society:

• The defendant shall provide financial support to dependents if 

financially able.

• The defendant shall seek, and work conscientiously, at lawful 

employment or pursue conscientiously a course of study or vocational 

training that will equip him for employment.

• The defendant shall refrain from knowingly meeting or communicating 

with any person he knows to be engaged, or planning to engage in 

criminal activity.

• The defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol or any use of a 

narcotic drug or other controlled substance.

• Defendant shall refrain from possessing a firearm, destructive device or 

other dangerous weapon. 

• Defendant shall participate, at the direction of a probation officer, in a 

substance abuse treatment program, which may include urine testing 

up to a maximum of 104 tests per year.

• Defendant shall refrain from knowingly leaving the federal judicial 

district where defendant is being supervised, unless granted permission 

to leave by the court or a probation officer.

• Defendant shall report to the probation office in the federal judicial 

district to which defendant is released within 72 hours of his release 

from imprisonment. Defendant shall thereafter report to a probation 

officer at reasonable times as directed by the court or a probation officer. 

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:142
11

• Defendant shall permit a probation officer to visit the defendant at any 

reasonable time at home; at work; at school; at a community service 

location; or at another reasonable location specified by a probation 

officer; and permit confiscation of any contraband observed in plain view 

of the probation officer.

• Defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of any 

change in residence, employer, or workplace and, absent constitutional 

or other legal privilege, answer inquiries by a probation officer.

• Defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours if arrested 

or questioned by a law enforcement officer.

• Defendant shall participate in an approved job skill-training program at 

the direction of a probation officer within the first 60 days of placement 

on supervision.

• Defendant shall, if unemployed after the first 60 days of supervision, or 

if unemployed for 60 days after termination or lay-off from employment, 

perform at least 20 hours of community service per week at the direction 

of the U.S. Probation Office until gainfully employed. The amount of 

community service shall not exceed 300 hours.

• Defendant shall not enter into any agreement to act as an informer or 

special agent of a law enforcement agency without the permission of the 

court. 

• Defendant shall observe one Reentry Court session, as instructed by his 

probation officer.

These supervised release terms are narrowly tailored to facilitate supervision 

by the probation officer, deter the defendant from future crimes, support defendant’s 

rehabilitation and reintegration into the community, ensure that he is engaged in 

lawful pursuits rather than criminal activity.

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:143
12

VI. CONCLUSION

In view of the Section 3553(a) factors, a sentence at the high end of the 

Guidelines range of 78 to 97 months is fair, reasonable, and sufficient, but not greater 

than necessary. For these reasons, the government respectfully requests that this 

Court impose a Guidelines sentence.

Respectfully submitted,

JOHN R. LAUSCH

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Cornelius Vandenberg 

CORNELIUS A. VANDENBERG

Assistant U.S. Attorney

219 South Dearborn Street, 5th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dated: August 11, 2021

Case: 1:20-cr-00281 Document #: 42 Filed: 08/11/21 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:144