MEMORANDUM & ORDER On October 21, 2016, a jury found Bernard Thomas (“Defendant”) guilty of one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1). On December 7, 2018, the Court sentenced Defendant to 51 months of incarceration, 3 years of supervised release, and payment of a $100.00 special assessment. This Court now re-sentences Defendant and provides a complete statement of reasons pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3553(c)(2) of those factors set forth by Congress and contained in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). For the reasons discussed below, Defendant is hereby sentenced to 51 months of incarceration, 3 years of supervised release, and payment of a $100.00 special assessment. BACKGROUND On March 25, 2016, the United States filed an Indictment charging Defendant with one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1). ECF No. 7. Beginning on August 1, 2016, Defendant was tried by a jury on the sole count of the Indictment in front of the Honorable Edward R. Korman. See ECF Nos. 64-66. On August 3, 2016, the jury reported it was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, and Judge Korman declared a mistrial. ECF No. 66. The matter was subsequently transferred to this Court. On September 9, 2016, the Government filed a Superseding Indictment charging Defendant with one count of Felon in Possession of Ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1). ECF No. 79. Defendant was thereafter tried in this Court on the sole count of the Superseding Indictment and, on October 21, 2016, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. ECF No. 101. The Court sentenced Defendant on December 8, 2017. See Memorandum and Order at 1, ECF No. 129. On March 20, 2019 the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed Defendant’s conviction, vacated his sentence, and remanded the case to this Court for resentencing. See United States v. Thomas, 765 F. App’x 553, 555 (2d Cir. 2019) (summary order). Specifically, the Second Circuit instructed the Court to determine: (1) whether Defendant was convicted under subdivision 1 of the New York Sexual Abuse Act in the First Degree (N. Y. Penal Law §130.65), and if so, whether that conviction qualifies as a violent felony warranting a sentencing enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), id. at 10-11; and (2) whether the special conditions of release requiring Defendant submit to a psychosexual evaluation and comply with sexual offender registration requirements are appropriate in this case. The Court held a status conference to discuss the resentencing issues, see Minute Entry, dated March 25, 2019, and set a briefing schedule with respect to those issues, see Order, ECF No. 175. On March 29, 2019, the Court granted the Government’s motion to direct the Clerk of Court for Queens Supreme Court to provide the government and Probation access to the file regarding Defendant’s conviction for sexual abuse for inspection and copy. See ECF No. 177. DISCUSSION The Court first addresses the Defendant’s sentence using the rubric of the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3553(c)(2) and then the proposed special conditions of supervised release. I. Sentencing A. Legal Standard 18 U.S.C. §3553 outlines the procedures for imposing a sentence in a criminal case. The “starting point and the initial benchmark” in evaluating a criminal sentence is the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49 (2007). If and when a district court chooses to impose a sentence outside of the United States Sentencing Guidelines range, the court “shall state in open court the reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence, and…the specific reason for the imposition of a sentence different from that described” in the Guidelines. 18 U.S.C. §3553(c)(2). The court must also “state[] with specificity” its reasons for so departing “in a statement of reasons form.” Id. “The sentencing court’s written statement of reasons shall be a simple, fact-specific statement explaining why the guidelines range did not account for a specific factor or factors under §3553(a).” United States v. Davis, 08-CR-332, 2010 WL 1221709, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2010) (Weinstein, J.). B. Analysis Section 3553(a) provides a set of seven factors for the Court to consider in determining what sentence to impose on a criminal defendant. This Court addresses each in turn. 1. The Nature and Circumstances of the Offense and the History and Characteristics of the Defendant The first §3553(a) factor requires the Court to evaluate “the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant.” 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(1). Defendant was born on August 30, 1965, in Far Rockaway, New York, where he lived in a low-income household with his mother and his six maternal half-siblings. See Revised Presentence Investigation Report (“Revised PSR”)
55-57, ECF No. 183. Growing up, Defendant’s biological father provided him with financial support but was not otherwise involved in Defendant’s upbringing. Id. 55. Defendant is close to his stepfather, who lives in Alabama with Defendant’s mother, and who Defendant considers a father figure. Id. Defendant reports he also is close with his maternal half-siblings, although his half-sister reported Defendant is not in regular contact with most of the siblings. Id.
