1

IN THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) No. 20 CR 216

 ) Judge Matthew F. Kennelly

MARCIN CIBOROWSKI, )

Defendant. )

MARCIN CIBOROWSKI’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

MARCIN CIBOROWSKI, by the FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM and 

its attorney, IMANI CHIPHE, respectfully requests that this Court sentence him 

to 18 months imprisonment and three years of supervised release.

The Pre-Sentence Investigation Report (PSR) concludes that Mr. 

Ciborowski’s advisory guideline range is 30 to 37 months. After considering the 

factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and applying them to Mr. Ciborowski, the 

PSR recommends a sentence of 18 months imprisonment. We concur. An 

eighteen-month sentence in prison is the right, just, and reasonable sentence in 

this case.

Mr. Ciborowski’s extraordinary acceptance of responsibility in this case

and the harshness of his incarceration due to the COVID-19 pandemic compel 
2

the conclusion that a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment coupled with 

supervised release is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to achieve the 

sentencing goals set forth by Congress in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).

I. The Factors Enumerated in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) of the Sentencing 

Reform Act Weigh in Favor of a Sentence of No More than 18 Months

Imprisonment.

A. The harshness of imprisonment during the COVID-19 pandemic

supports a sentence of 18 months imprisonment.

The Coronavirus pandemic has markedly affected the nature of 

imprisonment and has altered the landscape for sentencing. As this Court is wellaware, 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) “contains an overarching provision instructing district 

courts to ‘impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary,’ to 

accomplish the goals of sentencing.” Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 101 

(2007) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)); see also Holguin-Hernandez, 140 S. Ct. 762, 766 

(2020). With COVID, it is necessary to examine this statutory provision in a more 

deliberate way. The prolonged incarceration of Mr. Ciborowski, when he will 

have no access to communication, programming, and rehabilitative resources 

and faces an enormous risk to his health, is not necessary to meet the goals of 

sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A) provides that the Court must assess “the 

need for the sentence imposed— . . . to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to 

promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense.” As 
3

such, as part of its sentencing obligations, this Court must consider the need for 

the sentence imposed to “provide just punishment for the offense.” Because of 

COVID-19, Mr. Ciborowski has spent the last eighteen months essentially in 

lockdown conditions similar to solitary confinement, subjected to the constant 

fear of contracting a deadly disease, unable to assist his family in ensuring they 

are safe, and unable to visit family members or even his attorney. He will 

continue to face these struggles throughout any other sentence imposed upon 

him. 

Since March 13, 2020, BOP modified its operations to respond to the 

spread of COVID-19, and individuals in every institution” are “secured in their 

assigned cells/quarters to decrease the spread of the virus. Family and friends 

are prohibited from visiting. Programming, absent select UNICOR operations, 

has ceased, and movement throughout the facilities is suspended. And while 

BOP’s website claims movement exceptions are made to permit showers three 

times a week, telephone and email access, commissary, and laundry, in reality,

even these most basic activities are not allowed. Instead, conditions amount to a 

total lockdown for almost twenty-four hours a day. See Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 

Fed. Bureau of Prisons COVID-19 Action Plan (Mar. 13, 2020), 

https://www.bop.gov/resources/news/20200313_covid-19.jsp (Phase II). Phase II’s 
4

modified operations were extended as described in Phase III, Phase IV, Phase V, 

Phase VI, and Phase VII. Institution lockdown commenced on April 1, 2020 

(Phase V) and was subsequently extended through May 18, 2020 (Phase VI) and 

again through June 30, 2020 (Phase VII). At some facilities, once someone tests 

positive for the virus, they are put in solitary confinement. See, e.g., Class Action 

Complaint, Torres v. Milusnic, No. 20-cv-04450 (C.D. Cal. May 16, 2020), ECF No. 

1, at 55 (Declaration of Joanna Perales) (petitioner placed in Special Housing Unit 

(SHU) after testing positive for COVID-19); Class Action Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus, Hallinan v. Scarantino, No. 20-hc- 2088-FL (E.D.N.C. May 26, 

2020), ECF No. 1-4, at 6 (Declaration of Roger Duane Goodwin) (Petitioner in FCI 

Butner Medium I moved to the SHU after testing positive for COVID-19). See 

also Fed. Bureau of Prisons, BOP Implementing Modified Operations, 

https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/covid19_status.jsp.

Now with the surge of new COVID cases caused by the “Delta Variant,” it 

is likely that Mr. Ciborowski will again be on lockdown, prohibited from seeing 

his family, as he has been for more than a year, and unable to engage in 

rehabilitative or productive programming. He will also continue to be at grave 

risk of contracting COVID-19. CDC guidance, such as social distancing, is 

impossible to achieve in our federal prisons —particularly during a lockdown. 
5

Incarcerated individuals share bathrooms, sinks, showers, and telephones. They 

eat together and sleep in close proximity to each other. 

Unsurprisingly, these conditions have fueled the spread of COVID-19 

throughout BOP facilities. Thus, because of COVID-19, any time Mr. Ciborowski

spends in custody will necessarily be more severe than it ordinarily would. See 

also Fed. Bureau of Prisons, BOP Implementing Modified Operations, 

https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/covid19_status.jsp). In addition, 

programming and rehabilitative resources have been severely reduced, and 

instead, Mr. Ciborowski will be confined in his cell, much as he has been for the 

past nine months.

B. A sentence of eighteen months is the appropriate sentence in this 

case.

As the Court knows, a criminal sentence should seek to solve the problems 

caused by the crime productively. Criminal behavior presents a problem for the 

victim(s), the court that must decide the resolution, the person who committed 

the crime, and, most of all, for the community in which the crime was 

committed. The ideal solution works toward healing the damage suffered by all 

the players. Unless pure revenge can be considered an aspect of healing, there is
6

nothing that a prolonged custody sentence could do to heal Mr. Ciborowski or 

repair the damage that he has caused.

One of the reasons to send a person to prison is to protect the community 

from that person. The other is for punishment. The community has been 

protected from Mr. Ciborowski for the last 18 months. 

II. CONCLUSION

Marcin Ciborowski has accepted responsibility for his actions in this 

matter. Because of the harsh nature of his detention and any imprisonment he 

has suffered, a sentence of 18 months coupled with three years of supervise 

release is sufficient and the appropriate sentence in this case. A sentence of 

prolonged incarceration, on the other hand, is greater than necessary to achieve 

the sentencing goals set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
7

THEREFORE, Mr. Ciborowski requests that this Court sentence him to a 

term of 18 months confinement along with three years of supervised release.

Respectfully submitted,

FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM

John F. Murphy

Executive Director

By: s/ Imani Chiphe 

Imani Chiphe

Attorney for Marcin Ciborowski

IMANI CHIPHE

Federal Defender Program

55 East Monroe, Suite 2800

Chicago, IL 60603

312-621-8300
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, Imani Chiphe, attorney with the Federal Defender 

Program hereby certifies that in accordance with FED.R.CRIM. P. 49, FED. R. 

CIV. P5, LR5.5, and the General Order on Electronic Case Filing (ECF), the 

following document(s):

MARCIN CIBOROWSKI’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

was served pursuant to the district court’s ECF system as to ECF filings, if any, 

and were sent by first-class mail/hand delivery on August 9, 2021, to 

counsel/parties that are non-ECF filers.

FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM

John F. Murphy

Executive Director

By: s/Imani Chiphe 

 Imani Chiphe

IMANI CHIPHE

Federal Defender Program

55 East Monroe, Suite 2800

Chicago, IL 60603

312-621-8300

8