MEMORANDUM & ORDER On October 18, 2021, Dilshod Khusanov (“Defendant”) pleaded guilty to Attempting to Provide Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2339B(a)(1) pursuant to a plea agreement under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C). See October 18, 2021 Minute Entry, ECF No. 125; Plea Agreement, ECF No. 126. Under the agreement, Defendant and the Government agreed to a sentence of one hundred thirty-two (132) months of imprisonment and a supervised release term of life, as well as entry of a judicial order of removal. Plea Agreement
2, 5. The Court now accepts the parties’ Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement and provides a complete statement of reasons. For the reasons stated below, Defendant is hereby sentenced to one hundred thirty-two (132) months of imprisonment followed by a lifetime term of supervised release. The Court also enters the judicial order of removal, and orders Defendant to pay the $100.00 mandatory special assessment. BACKGROUND On August 29, 2017, a grand jury returned a two-count Indictment charging Defendant with (1) Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2339B(a)(1); and (2) Attempt to Provide Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2339B(a)(1). Indictment, ECF No. 1. Specifically, Defendant was charged with conspiring and attempting to provide financial support for individuals to travel to the Middle East to join the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (“ISIS”) and the al-Nusrah Front, which at all relevant times had been designated by the Secretary of State as foreign terrorist organizations. On October 18, 2021, Defendant pleaded guilty to Count Two of the Indictment pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement. See October 18, 2021 Minute Entry; Plea Agreement. At the conclusion of the change of plea hearing, the Court accepted Defendant’s plea of guilty and the Plea Agreement. See October 18, 2021 Minute Entry. Under paragraph two of the Plea Agreement, the Government and Defendant agreed to a sentence of one hundred thirty-two months of incarceration, followed by a lifetime term of supervised release. Plea Agreement 2. The Plea Agreement further states Defendant agrees to the entry of a stipulated judicial order of removal at the time of sentencing, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §§1228(c)(5) and 1227. Id 5. DISCUSSION I. Legal Standard The parties have agreed that the specified imprisonment and supervised release terms are not based on the Sentencing Guidelines. Plea Agreement 2. The Court must, nevertheless, consider the Guidelines in deciding whether to accept the plea agreement. See United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) §6B1.2. Under U.S.S.G. §6B1.2, the Court may accept an agreed-upon sentence under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) if “the agreed sentence is within the applicable guideline range.” Id. §6B1.2(c)(1). The Court may also accept the sentence if the agreed-upon sentence falls below the applicable guideline range and the Court provides “justifiable reasons” for the departure from the sentencing range and “set[s] forth [those reasons] with specificity in the statement of reasons form.” Id. §6B1.3(c)(2). Once the Court accepts the plea agreement, the Court is bound to the specific sentence agreed upon by the parties in the plea agreement. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) (“[A] recommendation or request binds the court once the court accepts the plea agreement[.]“). Rejection of the plea agreement or deviation from the agreed-upon sentence, however, permits Defendant to withdraw his guilty plea. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(5); U.S.S.G. §6B1.3. 18 U.S.C. §3553 outlines the procedures for imposing 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 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 or varying “in a statement of reasons form.” Id. Here, as explained below, the applicable Guidelines sentencing range for Defendant’s offense is 180 months of imprisonment. The agreed-upon sentence of one hundred thirty-two months of incarceration falls outside this range. Therefore, Court now provides a statement of “justifiable reasons” and 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, No. 8-CR-332, 2010 WL 1221709, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2010) (Weinstein, J.). II. Analysis A. The History and Characteristics of the Defendant and the Nature and Circumstances of the Offense 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). 1. Family and Personal Background Defendant was born on September 3, 1985 in Tashkent, Uzbekistan to Takhir Khusanov and Valida Khusanov. See Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”) 43. Defendant’s parents are retired and reside in Tashkent. Id. Defendant also has two sisters who reside in Tashkent, and with whom he reported close relationships. Id. 44. Defendant’s father and sisters are unaware of his conviction. Id.
