240-Month Sentence, More than Twice the Advisory Range, Affirmed for Mentally Ill Defendant
US v. Pinson, 2008 WL 4238999, No. 07-6013 et al. (Sept. 17, 2008)
Mr. Pinson, a 21-year-old "mentally-ill inmate with a propensity for making grandiose threats," was convicted of one count of threatening to harm the US President. Before sentencing, he told the district court that another inmate intended to kill the judge. This was false. He sent a letter to the Chief Judge for the district threatening to injure a juror. These exchanges resulted in two more convictions for willfully making a false statement to a US Marshall and for mailing a threatening communication. At sentencing, the district court varied upward and imposed the maximum he could on each count, to be served consecutively, for a total of 240 months imprisonment. He appealed the conviction for threatening the President and his sentence. The Court affirmed both the conviction and sentence "though not without some qualms about the latter."
There was no question but that Mr. Pinson was and is mentally ill with severe psychiatric problems. Nonetheless, after a 15-minute hearing, he was found competent to stand trial and, later, even to represent himself. At trial, Mr. Pinson's defense was that the letter was not a threat but a warning about a code he had cracked predicting the president would be killed by a third party. The jury found him guilty. Before sentencing, Mr. Pinson had more mental breakdowns and picked up the additional convictions, to which he pled guilty.
His guidelines range for all three convictions was 84-107 months. The court indicated it intended to vary upward. The government presented evidence that Mr. Pinson had written letters describing violent acts against people and animals, and made other threats. There was no corroboration that the acts had occurred or the threats carried out. The defense presented evidence that Mr. Pinson suffered from severe PTSD from severe childhood abuse and had a family history of mental illness.
The COA found sufficient evidence to support the conviction for threatening the President. It also affirmed the sentence, which was more than double the guideline range, even though it was somewhat concerned that the district court had effectively circumvented the civil commitment process and (as we know) effectively ensured that Mr. Pinson would be unlikely to receive adequate treatment in the prison setting for his unquestioned mental disorders. The district court's determination that he is a danger to the public was not clearly erroneous.
Mr. Pinson, a 21-year-old "mentally-ill inmate with a propensity for making grandiose threats," was convicted of one count of threatening to harm the US President. Before sentencing, he told the district court that another inmate intended to kill the judge. This was false. He sent a letter to the Chief Judge for the district threatening to injure a juror. These exchanges resulted in two more convictions for willfully making a false statement to a US Marshall and for mailing a threatening communication. At sentencing, the district court varied upward and imposed the maximum he could on each count, to be served consecutively, for a total of 240 months imprisonment. He appealed the conviction for threatening the President and his sentence. The Court affirmed both the conviction and sentence "though not without some qualms about the latter."
There was no question but that Mr. Pinson was and is mentally ill with severe psychiatric problems. Nonetheless, after a 15-minute hearing, he was found competent to stand trial and, later, even to represent himself. At trial, Mr. Pinson's defense was that the letter was not a threat but a warning about a code he had cracked predicting the president would be killed by a third party. The jury found him guilty. Before sentencing, Mr. Pinson had more mental breakdowns and picked up the additional convictions, to which he pled guilty.
His guidelines range for all three convictions was 84-107 months. The court indicated it intended to vary upward. The government presented evidence that Mr. Pinson had written letters describing violent acts against people and animals, and made other threats. There was no corroboration that the acts had occurred or the threats carried out. The defense presented evidence that Mr. Pinson suffered from severe PTSD from severe childhood abuse and had a family history of mental illness.
The COA found sufficient evidence to support the conviction for threatening the President. It also affirmed the sentence, which was more than double the guideline range, even though it was somewhat concerned that the district court had effectively circumvented the civil commitment process and (as we know) effectively ensured that Mr. Pinson would be unlikely to receive adequate treatment in the prison setting for his unquestioned mental disorders. The district court's determination that he is a danger to the public was not clearly erroneous.
posted by Anonymous at 9:42 AM
<< Home