The Defendant pled guilty to wire fraud, transporting stolen property
in interstate and foreign commerce, and money laundering. See July 16,
1997 Tr. at 5:23-25, 6:1-5. The activity constituting the bulk of the
Defendant's criminal conduct occurred over a two month period of time.
During that period, the Defendant had certain psychological and medical
concerns and was abusing cocaine and alcohol. See July 16, 1997 Tr. at
4:12-25, 5:1-10. After a short stay in the Cayman Islands, the Defendant
returned to the Philadelphia area. See November 8, 1999 Tr. at 24:23-25.
Upon his return, the Defendant began seeing his therapist twice a week and
confronted his cocaine problem by attending Narcotic Anonymous. See
November 8, 1999 Tr. at 24:14-20. In addition, the Defendant obtained
employment and eventually turned himself in to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI). See November 8, 1999 Tr. at 24:3-13. However, during
that time the Defendant still struggled with alcohol problems as
evidenced by two driving under the influence arrests in 1996. See March
25, 1998 Tr. at 13:2-5.
While incarcerated, the Defendant made excellent strides in becoming a
positive, contributing member of the prison community. During his
incarceration, the Defendant attempted to tackle some of the causes of
his personal problems by taking part in Narcotics Anonymous, Alcoholics
Anonymous, and by continuing sessions with his therapist. See November
8, 1999 Tr. at 20:8-15, 24:17-19. While at the Federal Correction
Institution (FCI) at Fort Dix, the Defendant actually supervised the
institution's reading program which obviated the need for the prison to
provide a teacher. See November 8, 1999 Tr. at 19:12-15. In addition, he
took part in a counseling group and became a mentor for other prisoners.
See November 8, 1999 Tr. at 19:16-19. This type of active and responsible
role is particularly important for this Defendant as he has a history of
depression, and drug and alcohol dependency.
Since that time, the Defendant has continually strived to maximize his
rehabilitative efforts. After his release from prison, the Defendant has
continually fought his problems with addiction by attending Narcotics
Anonymous two nights a week. See Def.'s Post-Appeal Sent. Mem. at 7.
These efforts have been successful to this point as the Defendant has
tested negative in every weekly urinalysis performed since he has been on
supervised release. See Def.'s Post-Appeal Sent. Mem. at 7. More
importantly, the Defendant has sought out and obtained employment. See
Def.'s Post-Appeal Sent. Mem. at 6-7. First, the Defendant worked as a
waiter at a local Philadelphia restaurant while searching for job
opportunities more commensurate with his prior work history. See Def.'s
Post-Appeal Sent. Mem. at 6. Then, at the time of the re-sentencing
hearing, the Defendant was about to start a new job as a Senior Account
Executive at a personnel placement agency. See Def.'s Post-Appeal Sent.
Mem. at 6-7.
When determining if these steps are extraordinary, the Court must look
at each situation "on a case-by-case basis, relying on the particular
facts and circumstances of each case . . . . Sally, 116 F.3d at 80.
Seldom does the Court have the opportunity at re-sentencing to get a
complete glimpse of the Defendant's potential for rehabilitation. The
Court has had that opportunity in this case. While in prison, the
Defendant strove to be a positive force by helping others. In doing so,
he was rewarded and shown to be a model prisoner. In addition, during his
incarceration and after his release, the Defendant has worked to overcome
the drug problem that has afflicted him. Since the offense at issue, the
Defendant has dealt directly
with three of the underlying issues surrounding his criminal conduct, his
drug use, his medical concerns, and his mental health. See United States
v. Kane, 88 F. Supp.2d 408, 413 (E.D.Pa. 2000) (granting downward
departure when defendant "demonstrated a genuine commitment to repairing
his life which has been sadly damaged by his long-time abuse of drugs and
alcohol"). By putting an emphasis on staying "clean," the Defendant has
increased his chances for successfully maintaining the gainful employment
he has obtained. In doing so, the Court finds that the Defendant has made
the requisite demonstration that he is committed to repairing and
rebuilding his life. See United States v. Turner, No. CRIM.A.95-520-01,
2000 WL 307355, at *2 (E.D.Pa. Mar. 24, 2000) (treatment for drug problem
and continued employment showed commitment to a permanent positive
transformation). It is clear that working in responsible employment and
remaining drug free are "concrete gain[s]" toward turning his life
around. See Turner, 2000 WL 307355, at *2. "As a now sober, hardworking,
and dependable member of society, [the Defendant] has demonstrated a
positive and lasting transformation in his behavior that is
extraordinary." See United States v. Ortiz, 100 F. Supp.2d 295, 300
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants the Defendant's motion
for a downward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0.
The Defendant, David Bockius, pled guilty to offenses which fall within
the heartland of the money laundering guideline U.S.S.G. § 2S1.1. As
a result, he faces a sentence based upon an offense level of 21 (taking
into account the acceptance of responsibility reduction) with a criminal
history category of III. However, the Court finds that Mr. Bockius has
demonstrated a commitment to repairing and rebuilding his life that is
extraordinary. Mr. Bockius' commitment to self-improvement, battle with a
drug dependency, and his successful attempt to obtain gainful employment
represent extraordinary and concrete efforts to turn his life around. As
a result, the Court grants his motion for a downward departure.
Because the Court has granted the Defendant's motion for a downward
departure, the Court will depart by 4 levels and sentence the Defendant
based upon an offense level of 17 (taking into account the acceptance of
responsibility reduction) with a criminal history category of III.
Therefore, the Defendant is sentenced to 36 months imprisonment, followed
by three years of supervised release, restitution of $581,500, and a
special assessment in the amount of $150.
An appropriate Order follows.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
AND NOW, this 9th day of August, 2001, upon consideration of the
Government's Post-Appeal Sentencing Memorandum (Docket No. 78), the
Defendant's Post-Appeal Sentencing Memorandum (Docket No. 79), the
Government's Reply Memorandum on Re-sentencing (Docket No. 81), the
Defendant's Response to Government's Reply Memorandum on Re-sentencing
(Docket No. 82), and the Government's Supplemental Memorandum on
Re-sentencing (Docket No. 83), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
the Defendant's motion for a downward departure is
the sentence the Defendant based upon an offense level of
17, a criminal history category of III; and
the Defendant is sentenced to 36 months imprisonment,
three years of supervised release, restitution of
$581,500, and a special assessment in the amount of
© 1992-2003 VersusLaw Inc.