Opinion ID: 2994178
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Attempting to Fix Criminal Cases

Text: Also in January 1995, Jones had a number of conversations with a cooperating witness (CW). In these conversations, Jones agreed to help the CW in an upcoming court case/2 and the CW, in turn, gave him approximately $1,000. Unsatisfied with the $1,000, Jones later telephoned the CW and asked him for another $500. That same afternoon, the CW handed the defendant another $500. Apparently believing that the well would never run dry, Jones, in February 1995, contacted the CW again and asked for even more money to continue to allegedly assist the CW with the same criminal case. This time, the CW did not give the officer any additional money. In addition to the facts described above, the plea agreement states that because Jones was responsible for at least 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine, Jones’s base offense level was 38. The plea agreement, however, also notes that Jones disputes this calculation. Furthermore, the plea agreement also contains a provision stating that if Jones cooperates fully and truthfully with the government, it would, in return, consider whether Jones’s cooperation qualifies as ’substantial assistance’ pursuant to U.S.S.G. sec. 5K1.1 and 18 U.S.C. sec. 3553(e). The plea agreement also set forth in writing that Jones acknowledges that the determination as to whether he has provided ’substantial assistance’ rests solely with the government. (emphasis added). Following Jones’s guilty plea, the trial judge ordered the United States Probation Office to prepare a Presentence Investigation Report (PSR). The Probation Officer submitted the PSR and concluded, based on information supplied by the FBI as well as the U.S. Attorney’s Office, that Jones should be held accountable for more than
the drug organizations described above individually distributed well in excess of 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine during the time frame set forth. At Jones’s sentencing hearing, the defendant asked the judge not to impose the sentence recommended in the PSR because, according to Jones, the PSR incorrectly calculated his base offense level by improperly attributing more than 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine to him. Additionally, Jones argued that he was entitled, especially in light of his lengthy sentence and prior military and police service record, to a downward departure for his alleged substantial assistance. The judge rejected both of Jones’s arguments, concluding that the evidence in the record was more than sufficient to establish that Jones should be held accountable for at least 1.5 kilograms of crack cocaine. The court also found that the government’s refusal to file a motion under section 5K1.1 for a downward departure was proper because Jones had not as yet offered any substantial assistance in any other related federal cases. The judge did note, however, that it is understood by the Court that future assistance might be considered upon the recommendation of the Government. Jones appeals.