United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON
Waddoups United States District Judge.
Clark Waddoups Defendant John Eugene Walker appears before
this court for resentencing following the Tenth Circuit Court
of Appeal's reversal and remand of his prior sentence.
See United States v. Walker, 844 F.3d 1253 (10th
December 11, 2013, Mr. Walker pled guilty to two counts of
bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). On
May 13, 2014, the court deferred sentencing for thirteen
months to allow Mr. Walker to enroll in a residential
treatment program. Mr. Walker returned to the court for
sentencing on September 22, 2015. Based on the Presentence
Report (“PSR”), the court calculated Mr.
Walker's total offense level at 29 with a criminal
history category of VI, resulting in a Guideline range of 151
to 188 months with a period of one to three years of
supervised release or one to five years of probation.
(See Transcript of Sentencing (“Sentencing
tr.”) 11, Dkt. No. 40.) The statutory maximum for this
offense is 240 months. See 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a).
There is no mandatory minimum. See Id. The court
originally imposed a sentence of time served followed by 36
months of supervised release, a $200 special assessment, and
$3, 695.50 in restitution. (Sentencing tr. 39; see
Judgment, Dkt. No. 43.) The court imposed the standard
conditions of supervised release, as well as special
conditions relating to restitution, drug and alcohol testing,
and mental health treatment. (See Sentencing tr.
39-42; Judgment 3-6.)
government appealed the sentence, and the Tenth Circuit
reversed and remanded, finding the sentence substantively
unreasonable in light of the statutory sentencing factors and
precedent. Walker, 844 F.3d at 1255. In particular,
the Tenth Circuit found this court focused “almost
exclusively” on one sentencing factor, while
“fail[ing] to give any weight to” other relevant
sentencing factors. Id. at 1259.
remand, the court ordered the parties to file resentencing
memoranda analyzing the statutory factors outlined in the
Tenth Circuit's decision and recommending a sentence for
Mr. Walker based on those factors. (Dkt. No. 52.) The court
also ordered the probation office to provide a written update
of Mr. Walker's history while on supervised release and
any other conduct that could bear on resentencing.
(Id.) The probation office provided a written
supplement to the PSR detailing Mr. Walker's conduct on
supervised release, (Dkt. No. 56), and Mr. Walker and the
government submitted resentencing memoranda, (Dkt. Nos. 53,
57 & 61). The court also received a victim impact
statement, (Dkt. No. 62), and a written statement from Mr.
Walker's mental health and substance abuse counselor,
April 24, 2017, the court held a hearing wherein the parties
presented further evidence and arguments on resentencing. The
court heard testimony from twelve witnesses. The government
also submitted several exhibits related to Mr. Walker's
car purchase just before the robberies in May 2013 and his
violations of the presentence release conditions in April
2014. The court heard argument from each side, and Mr. Walker
directly addressed the court. At the conclusion of the
hearing, the court indicated that it would take the
resentencing decision under advisement in order to fully
consider all evidence in light of the statutory sentencing
factors and the Tenth Circuit's remand opinion. Neither
party objected to the continuance. The court continued the
resentencing to May 18, 2017.
outset, the court must determine the appropriate scope of the
mandate on resentencing. “Resentencing on remand is
typically de novo, but an appellate court may limit the
district court's discretion pursuant to the mandate
rule.” United States v. Keifer, 198 F.3d 798,
801 (10th Cir. 1999). In the Tenth Circuit, “the scope
of the mandate on remand . . . is carved out by exclusion:
unless the district court's discretion is specifically
cabined, it may exercise discretion on what may be
heard.” United States v. West, 646 F.3d 745,
749 (10th Cir. 2011). The district court must look to the
appellate court's mandate “for any limitations on
the scope of remand and, in the absence of such limitations,
exercise discretion in determining the appropriate
remand language in this case states:
We conclude that 33 days in pretrial detention constitutes an
unreasonably short sentence. For admittedly robbing two banks
as an armed career offender, Mr. Walker would avoid
any punishment and the sentence would give little or no
weight to the congressional values of punishment, general
deterrence, incapacitation, respect for the law, and
avoidance of unwarranted sentence disparities. In these
circumstances, we regard the sentence as substantively
Reversed and remanded for resentencing consistent with this
Walker, 844 F.3d at 1259-60. The court finds this
language constitutes a general remand for resentencing
consistent with the opinion. Based on the record before it,
the Tenth Circuit held the time-served sentence, after 33
days of pretrial detention, and 36 months of supervised
release “unreasonably short” and
“substantively unreasonable” because the sentence
gave “little or no weight to the congressional values
of punishment, general deterrence, incapacitation, respect
for the law, and avoidance of unwarranted sentence
disparities.” Id. at 1259.
Tenth Circuit's mandate does not require imposition of a
specific sentence or limit this court to considering
sentences only within the Guideline range. See United
States v. Brown, 212 F. App'x 747, 751 (10th Cir.
2007) (unpublished) (noting “[a] review of [Tenth
Circuit] case law shows that [the Circuit] require[s] quite a
high level of specificity to limit a remand on
resentencing”). Nor does the mandate include language
prohibiting this court from varying downward from the
Guideline range. Compare United States v. Webb, 98
F.3d 585 (10th Cir.1996) (concluding that the language in
Webb I, 49 F.3d 636, 640 (10th Cir.1995)--“The
decision of the district court to depart from the applicable
guideline range is therefore REVERSED. The Case is REMANDED
for resentencing within the prescribed range of twenty-seven
to thirty-three months imprisonment”--prohibited the
district court from departing downward from the articulated
range at resentencing). Therefore, following the mandate on
remand, this court must appropriately weigh the specific
congressional values the Tenth Circuit identified, as well as
all the 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors, and craft a sentence
that is consistent with sentencing objectives, the Tenth
Circuit's opinion, and other sentencing precedent.
in keeping with the principle of de novo sentencing on
remand, this court has discretion to receive “any
relevant evidence the court could have heard at the first
sentencing hearing.” Keifer, 198 F.3d at 801
(quoting United States v. Moore, 83 F.3d 1231, 1234
(10th Cir. 1996)). As the Supreme Court recently recognized,
“[s]entencing courts have long enjoyed discretion in
the sort of information they may consider when setting an
appropriate sentence. This durable tradition remains, even as
federal laws have required sentencing courts to evaluate
certain factors when exercising their discretion.”
Dean v. United States, 581 U.S., 137 S.Ct. 1170,
1175 (2017) (citing Pepper v. United States, 562
U.S. 476, 487-89 (2011)). The Sentencing Reform Act
specifically provides that “[n]o limitation shall be
placed on the information concerning the background,
character, and conduct of a person convicted of an offense
which a court of the United States may receive and consider
for the purpose of imposing an appropriate sentence.”
18 U.S.C. § 3661. The Supreme Court implemented this
statutory principle in affirming that “a district court
at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendant's
postsentencing rehabilitation and that such evidence may, in
appropriate cases, support a downward variance from the
now-advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines range.”
Pepper, 562 U.S. at 481.
before considering the sentencing factors, the court will
first summarize the evidence before it on resentencing,
including evidence presented at the prior sentencing and new
evidence received after remand.
Prior to Remand On May 29, 2013, a grand jury indicted
Mr. Walker on two counts of bank robbery, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2113(a). (Dkt. No. 6.) Mr. Walker was arraigned
on May 30, 2013 and requested that the detention hearing be
continued. (Dkt. No. 8.) On June 25, 2013, Magistrate Judge
Evelyn J. Furse held a detention hearing and ordered Mr.
Walker released on conditions. (Dkt. No. 13.) On December 11,
2013, Mr. Walker pled guilty to both counts of the
indictment. (Dkt No. 19.) Mr. Walker pled to the following
On May 3, 2013, [Mr. Walker] robbed the U.S. Bank located at
888 East 4500 South, in Salt Lake City, Utah while dressed as
a construction worker and carrying a dark colored messenger
style bag. Upon entering the bank, [Mr. Walker] approached
the teller counter and demanded money from the teller. The
teller complied and gave [him] approximately $2152.50 in U.S.
currency, which [he] put in the bag and left the bank.
On May 22, 2013, [Mr. Walker] robbed the Zions Bank located
at 8955 South 700 East in Sandy, Utah while dressed in
women's clothing and carrying a light blue purse. After
entering the bank, [Mr. Walker] approached the teller
counter, placed the purse on the teller counter and demanded
money. The teller complied and gave [him] approximately $1543
in U.S. currency, which [he] put in the purse and left the
(Dkt. No. 20.) A sentencing hearing was set for February 13,
2014, but later continued to May 13, 2014, at Mr.
Walker's request. (Dkt. Nos. 19 & 23.) Mr. Walker had
moved with his family to Ohio in September 2013, was having
trouble finding stable work while supporting his family, and
requested “some additional time to get his family in
better financial shape before sentencing.” (Dkt. No.
before sentencing, on April 28, 2014, Mr. Walker violated his
conditions of presentence release by receiving a DUI and open
container charge in Ohio. (See Dkt. Nos. 27 &
31.) At sentencing, Mr. Walker indicated that he had been
tentatively accepted by a residential treatment program and
requested that the court defer sentencing for thirteen months
to allow him to complete the program. Mr. Walker had sold his
car in order to pay for the program. (Dkt. No. 49, p. 25-26.)
The government did not object, (Id. at 27), and the
court granted the deferral, (Dkt. No. 32). On June 4, 2015,
Mr. Walker successfully completed Lansing Teen Challenge, a
faith-based residential treatment program in central
Michigan. (Dkt. No. 36.)
September 22, 2015, Mr. Walker appeared before this court for
sentencing. At this time, Mr. Walker had served 33 days in
pretrial detention and 819 days (approximately 27 months) on
submitted in advance of sentencing reports that Mr. Walker
has a long criminal history, which is only surpassed by his
long addiction to alcohol and drugs. (Dkt. No. 39.) Mr.
Walker began using alcohol at an early age and has been an
alcoholic “all his life.” (Id. at 22.)
He began using methamphetamine daily in his twenties.
(Id.) In 1987, Mr. Walker committed armed bank
robberies in Nevada, for which he was incarcerated
approximately 14 years (paroled in 2001). (Id. at
11.) While in prison, he used meth intravenously at least
once per month until he got clean in 1997. (Id. at
22.) In 2004, he committed another bank robbery, this time in
Utah, for which he served five years in prison (until 2009)
and three years on supervised release (until 2012).
(Id. at 14-15.) During the years when Mr. Walker was
not incarcerated, he was convicted of several felony drug
possession charges and misdemeanor DUI/intoxication charges.
(See Id. at 9-17.) From April 2009 through 2012, Mr.
Walker successfully completed a term of supervised release
and was apparently clean for three years, but he relapsed on
meth in 2013. (Id. at 14, 22.) After completing Teen
Challenge in June 2015, Mr. Walker had been clean from all
substances for nearly two years. (Id. at 23.)
sentencing, Mr. Walker first objected to the career offender
enhancement in the PSR, but, after hearing argument from the
parties, the court found that the enhancement applied.
(See Dkt. No. 40, pp. 3-11.) The court accepted the
PSR and calculated Mr. Walker's total offense level at 29
and criminal history category at VI (with or without the
career offender enhancement), resulting in a Guideline range
of 151 to 188 months. (See Dkt. No. 39; Dkt. No. 40,
p. 11.) The government, represented by Assistant United
States Attorney Drew Yeates, recommended a sentence of 120
months, noting its concern with Mr. Walker's history of
bank robberies, but also a concern about a
within-guideline-range sentence for a defendant of Mr.
Walker's age (at that time, 55 years old). (See
Dkt. No. 40, p. 12.) Mr. Walker's counsel, Federal
Defender Adam Bridge, argued that considering the sentencing
factors in light of Mr. Walker's extensive
rehabilitation, a five-year term of probation would be
sufficient to serve the purposes of sentencing in Mr.
Walker's case. (See Id. at 12-16.) Mr. Walker
addressed the court and spoke at length about the difference
Teen Challenge had made in his life, both for his
relationships with his family and his engagement with his
community. (See Id. at 16-27.) Ms. Walker (formerly,
Ms. Detry) also spoke to how Teen Challenge had changed Mr.
Walker. She felt that Mr. Walker “did do [his]
time” while in Teen Challenge, noting that the program
was very long and strict, resulting in many failures by
others, and employed a “work your way up” ethic
under which Mr. Walker excelled. (See Id. at 27-33.)
The court then discussed the § 3553(a) factors and
ultimately imposed a time-served sentence to be followed by
36 months of supervised release. (Id. at 33-39;
see also Judgment, Dkt. No. 43.)
resentencing, the court has received additional evidence
spanning from Mr. Walker's commission of the two bank
robberies in May 2013 through his pretrial/post-release
conduct as of April 2017.
the Probation Office submitted a Supplemental Memorandum to
the PSR. (Dkt. No. 56.) Probation Officer Renee Lewis stated
that since the September 2015 sentencing, Mr. Walker has been
supervised in the Northern District of Ohio. (Id. at
1.) His supervising probation officer in Ohio, Adam Jones,
reported that Mr. Walker has complied with all conditions of
supervision, including maintaining employment, paying
restitution monthly, and completing random drug testing with
no positive results. (Id.) Mr. Walker works for
R.B.P. One, Inc. as a painter and has earned several raises.
(Id.) He and his wife live a modest life, and he
continues to work on restoring his relationships with his
siblings and children. (Id. at 1-2.) Mr. Walker also
continues to see a mental health counselor once a month and
has remained sober with no relapses. (Id. at 2.) He
attends church, self-improvement classes offered by his
church, and Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings.
(Id.) He has led several AA groups, which have given
him the opportunity to speak about his experiences and
court also received a written statement from Angie Skinner,
Mr. Walker's court-ordered mental health counselor and a
Licensed Clinical Christian Counselor. Ms. Skinner reports
that Mr. Walker has made “significant improvement in
every area of his life and has taken his recovery very
seriously.” She reports that he has been clean since
April 29, 2014, and that he no longer has cravings for drugs
or alcohol. Mr. Walker got married on December 31, 2015. Ms.
Skinner considers him “a contributing member of
society” who “provides for his family and is a
faithful husband and father.” Along with the church and
AA meetings, Mr. Walker has completed volunteer work at his
church, including painting and repairs. Ms. Skinner recalls
that when she first began meeting with Mr. Walker, in
November 2013, “he was a very lost and broken man who
had suffered with addiction and depression for most of his
life.” Ms. Skinner saw that when life became
challenging or stressful, Mr. Walker would turn to drugs and
alcohol to cope, which led him “to make very poor
decisions.” Mr. Walker still has many stressors in his
life since completing Teen Challenge, including helping his
wife through three major surgeries and recovery, but now he
“turns to God, his faith community and mentors for help
instead of drugs or alcohol and handles all stressors in his
environment appropriately.” Ms. Skinner concludes with
her professional opinion that Mr. Walker “has been
rehabilitated and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest
otherwise, ” and that Mr. Walker “is a healthy,
happy member of society.”
Walker's resentencing memorandum also includes a small
flood of letters from staff at Teen Challenge, his pastor,
church and community members, members of his anti-addiction
classes, his wife, his step-daughter, and his employer, all
uniformly praising his character, work ethic, and the
progress he has made in the past years. (See Dkt.
Nos. 53-2 through 53-6.)
the court received a victim impact statement from an unnamed
victim. (Dkt. No. 62.) The victim states that Mr.
Walker's robbery of U.S. Bank “took my sense of
security.” The victim recounts Mr. Walker yelling and
aggressively demanding money. The victim was not sure if Mr.
Walker was armed, but noticed his right hand close to his
waist band. The victim “felt helpless” at the
time and has been uneasy in public places since the robbery,
feeling that he “cannot fully relax” in public
because “in [his] mind there is always potential for
danger.” The victim notes that Mr. Walker clearly put
thought into the robbery by dressing as a construction
worker, and related a belief that Mr. Walker “will
attempt to rob again and hurt or kill someone next
time.” The victim concludes that “[i]f someone
can rob banks and then be out on the streets again within a
few years, I think the justice system is failing in
resentencing hearing, Assistant United States Attorneys Cy
Castle and Drew Yeates appeared on behalf of the government,
and Federal Defender Adam Bridge appeared on behalf of Mr.
Walker. The government first called eight witnesses: Rob
Scott, Heather Blanco, Stephen Rick Brimley, Chris Platts,
Chanelle Torgerson, Austin Bentley, Scott Quillen, and
Law Enforcement Testimony
2013, Sergeant Rob Scott was a detective for the violent
crimes unit of the Unified Police Department. (Transcript of
Evidentiary Hearing on Resentencing (“Resentencing
tr.”) 12, Dkt. No. 68.) Sgt. Scott was assigned to
investigate the Zions Bank robbery. (Id.) Sgt. Scott
also transported Mr. Walker from the Salt Lake County Jail to
the federal courthouse on May 28, 2013. (Id. at 13.)
During transportation, Sgt. Scott began talking with Mr.
Walker about why he committed the robberies, and Mr. Walker
said that since being released from federal prison he was
having financial trouble and having a hard time making ends
meet. (Id. at 14.)
Heather Blanco was a detective in the person crimes unit of
the Sandy City Police Department in 2013, and she was also
assigned to investigate the Zions Bank robbery. (Id.
at 15-16.) Sgt. Blanco arrested and interviewed Mr. Walker
about the robbery. After waiving his Miranda rights,
Mr. Walker told Sgt. Blanco that he robbed the bank because
he was having a difficult time financially and was not making
enough at his job to pay all of his bills. (Id. at
16-17.) Sgt. Blanco also explained that Mr. Walker had
entered the bank with a foil-lined purse, and that the
purpose of the foil would be to defeat any GPS location
device the bank might turn over with the money.
(Id.) Sgt. Blanco further testified that Mr. Walker
had a getaway driver during the robbery, but he did not
assist police officers in identifying that person.
(Id. at 17-18.)
Employment & Car Dealership Testimony
Rick Brimley is co-owner of Mountain States Moving and
Storage Company and Quick Transportation. (Id. at
19.) Mr. Brimley employed Mr. Walker as a local truck driver
from April 2, 2012 through May 23, 2013. (Id.) Mr.
Walker received one raise at some point after the first four
months of his employment. (Id. at 22.) Mr. Brimley
found Mr. Walker to be a very helpful and good employee until
the end of his tenure with the company. (Id. at
20-21.) During the last month of his employment, Mr. Brimley
thought Mr. Walker became somewhat negative and
confrontational, and seemed to resent having to come to work.
(Id. at 21-22.) On May 3, 2013, Mr. Walker left work
early, saying that he had met a girl and that they were going
to move away from Utah. (Id. at 24.)
Walker passed a pre-employment drug screen, but he was not
selected to be randomly drug tested at any other time during
his employment with the trucking company. (Id. at
23, 24.) The random drug screens would not have tested for
alcohol. (Id. at 25.) Mr. Brimley did not recall Mr.
Walker having any drug problems that the company was aware of
while he was employed. (Id. at 23.) When Mr. Walker
was arrested, Mr. Brimley was present and was aware that the
police found drugs and syringes in Mr. Walker's lunch
box. (Id. at 25.) Mr. Brimley agreed that Mr. Walker
may have been using drugs before his arrest, but Mr. Brimley
did not know if he was using them or selling them.
(Id. at 25.)
Platts owns a car dealership at 4000 South State in Salt Lake
City. (Id. at 26.) In May 2013, Mr. Platts sold Mr.
Walker a green Toyota Solara with gold trim. (Id. at
27.) Mr. Walker's girlfriend (now wife) Vicky Detry was a
joint applicant for the vehicle. (Id.; see
Gov't Ex. 101, Dkt. No. 65.) On May 2, 2013, Mr. Walker
and Ms. Detry signed a promissory note for $500 as a down
payment for the vehicle. (Resentencing tr. 29; see
Gov't Ex. 104, Dkt. No. 65.) Mr. Platts confirmed that
Mr. Walker timely paid the down payment on or before May 16,
2013, and had possession of the car before that date.
(Resentencing tr. 30.) Mr. Walker and Ms. Detry received
financing for the car in the amount of $6, 454.95.
(Id. at 31; see Gov't Ex. 105, Dkt. No.
65.) Mr. Platts recalled Mr. Walker as a nice guy who was
pleasant to work with and on time with his obligations.
(Resentencing tr. 32.) Mr. Platts did not perceive Mr. Walker
to be under the influence of any drugs or alcohol during
their interactions. (Id.) On the day Mr. Walker paid
the $500 down payment, he brought a young man with him as an
attempted referral. (Id. at 32-33.) The young man
appeared to Mr. Platts to be on drugs and attempted to sell
Mr. Platts a firearm, but Mr. Platts was not interested.
(Id. at 33.)
Torgerson was the first victim to testify. Ms. Torgerson
worked for U.S. Bank as a head teller on May 3, 2013, during
the robbery. (Id. at 35.) When Mr. Walker entered
the bank screaming, Ms. Torgerson thought he was a grumpy
customer and approached him to try to diffuse the situation.
(Id. at 36.) Mr. Walker, who was dressed as a
construction worker and had what looked like a soft cooler
bag with him, was yelling “top and bottom, top and
bottom” at another teller named Austin. (Id.
at 36-37.) When Ms. Torgerson realized that this was a
robbery, she began handing him the money in her top and
bottom drawers, including a tracker. (Id. at 38.)
She described Mr. Walker as ignorant and confused, and
reported to officers afterwards that he was high and
“not himself.” (Id. at 38, 41.) She did
not like how he was screaming and being disrespectful toward
them. (Id. at 38.) Mr. Walker kept screaming for
more money, and Ms. Torgerson kept saying her drawers were
empty, at which point Mr. Walker left. (Id. at 39.)
Ms. Torgerson had never been part of a robbery before, and
she testified that it has affected her life “a little
bit.” (Id.) She continued: “When I go
into the bank, I have to be more paranoid now that this trial
has been back up and everyone is bringing it back up, like, I
have anxiety when I see construction workers. I know it's
weird, but it happens.” (Id.) A counselor
spoke to the employees the Monday after the robbery, but Ms.
Torgerson has not sought counseling since. (Id. at
40, 42.) Ms. Torgerson felt that the contact brought about by
the resentencing had re-opened some of the experiences
associated with the robbery. (Id. at 42.)
Bentley was shadowing tellers at the U.S. Bank on May 3,
2013. (Id. at 44-45.) He recalled that a man walked
quickly into the bank dressed as a construction worker, cut
in front of another customer, put a bag on the counter, and
said aggressively and loudly “fill it up, top and
bottom.” (Id. at 45.) At one point, Mr. Walker
backed away from the counter and put his hand over his hip
area, and the thought went through Mr. Bentley's head
that Mr. Walker could be armed, though Mr. Bentley did not
see any weapon. (Id.) When asked whether the robbery
impacted his life, Mr. Bentley said: “I would say that
it has. Definitely a little more anxious when I see things
that I feel are out of place in, you know, public settings or
banks, things like that.” (Id. at
Quillen was the branch manager at U.S. Bank on the day of the
robbery. (Id. at 48.) Mr. Quillen was sitting in the
bank desk, facing the door, and initiating a wire transfer
for a customer when he realized there was an irate
individual, dressed in construction clothing, in the lobby.
(Id. at 49.) As the branch manager, Mr. Quillen felt
that he had to respond. (Id.) When Mr. Quillen
approached, however, Mr. Walker started toward him and asked
him if he wanted to get hit and wanted to be on the ground.
(Id. at 50.) Mr. Quillen had never before
experienced a bank robbery or physical threat. (Id.)
After this experience, Mr. Quillen stated: “I feel a
more presence of anxiety, a general nervousness. I made sure,
at that location, I had moved to an office location where my
desk would face a window so I could monitor the parking lot
at all times for people coming in and going out of our
building.” (Id. at 51.)
Moss was a teller at Zions Bank during the robbery on May 22,
2013. (Id. at 52.) Mr. Moss recalled that, shortly
before closing, a man dressed in women's clothing walked
purposefully into the bank. (Id.) Mr. Moss
immediately knew that a robbery was taking place and tried to
alert his coworkers. (Id. at 53.) Mr. Walker asked
Mr. Moss in a woman's voice to give him all of the money.
(Id.) After Mr. Moss declined, Mr. Walker slammed
his hands on the counter and yelled multiple times in a
man's voice “give me all of your money.”
(Id.) Mr. Moss pulled the silent alarm and started
giving Mr. Walker money as slowly as he could. (Id.
at 54-55.) Mr. Moss noticed Mr. Walker gesturing to his chest
and shoulder multiple times; though he did not note the
significance at the time, others in the branch afterwards
said a holster was under his arm. (Id. at 54.) Mr.
Walker asked for money from the other drawers, and Mr. Moss
went to each until they were empty. (Id. at 55.) At
some point, the branch manager approached Mr. Walker from
behind, and Mr. Walker turned to yell something in reference
to bodily harm at him. (Id. at 56.) Mr. Walker then
left, seeming agitated and frustrated that he did not get
what he needed or wanted. (Id.) Mr. Moss followed
Mr. Walker to the getaway vehicle, a green Toyota Solara with
gold trim and dealer's tags. (Id. at 57.) Mr.
Moss wrote down the information for the car as it drove away.
(Id.) Mr. Moss felt the whole situation was
threatening, but noted that he had lived abroad and
experienced multiple life-threatening incidents that had
changed his opinion of dangerous situations. (Id. at
Probation Officer, Mental Health Counselor, and Pastor
the government's final witness, Mr. Walker called Adam
Jones, Angie Skinner, and Danny Akers to testify via
videoconference from Ohio.
Officer Adam Jones began supervising Mr. Walker in Ohio in
June 2016.(Resentencing tr. 59-60.) Mr. Jones sees
Mr. Walker quarterly and has conducted three home visits
during his period of supervision, with no violations of
concern. (Id. at 61, 69.) Mr. Jones reported that
Mr. Walker lives in a modest home, which was formerly his
father-in-law's home, with his wife and a few pets.
(Id. at 61.) Mr. and Ms. Walker also sometimes care
for their granddaughter. (Id.) Mr. Jones reported
that Mr. Walker has complied with all conditions of
supervision, made regular restitution payments, submitted to
random drug screens, and attended mental health treatment.
(Id. at 62.)
Probation Office's Post-Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA)
factors place Mr. Walker at a low to moderate risk level.
(Id. at 67.) The PCRA measures various risk factors
related to the offender--both static (age, criminal history)
and dynamic (employment, drug and alcohol use, social
networks, criminal thinking)--so the probation office can
identify and address any risk areas and prevent recidivism.
(Id. at 62-63.) Considering the dynamic factors, Mr.
Jones was unable to identify any present criminal cognition
concerns or anti-social associations in Mr. Walker's
case. Rather, Mr. Jones acknowledged a number of pro-social
activities and positive voluntary associations in which Mr.
Walker engages, including church functions, addiction
recovery meetings, and marriage classes. (Id. at
64-65.) Mr. Walker has a stable job as a painter and recently
received a raise. (Id. at 66.) He has not failed any
drug screen on supervised release. (Id. at 67.) Mr.
Jones felt that Mr. Walker has not shown any risk of
recidivating at this time and that Mr. Walker has done
exceptionally well relative to other career offenders and
bank robbers he supervises. (Id. at 68, 75.)
cross examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Yeates asked Mr.
Jones if Mr. Walker's position today would be similar to
his position in May 2013, when he also had a job, girlfriend,
and church. (Id. at 70-71.) Mr. Jones did not know
Mr. Walker in 2013, but responded that, based on those
factors, he would assume the positions were similar.
(Id. at 71.) The government also submitted
documentation of Mr. Walker's presentence release
violation in April 2014, including citations for an open
container and DUI. (Id. at 72-73; see
Gov't Exs. 107-111, Dkt. No. 65.) In the citation, Mr.
Walker's blood alcohol content was measured at .151.
(Resentencing tr. 72; see Gov't Exs. 107, 108
& 111.) Mr. Jones could not say whether Mr. Walker was
attending drug treatment at that time, though he would have
been required to as a condition of his release. (Resentencing
court asked Mr. Jones whether, based on his experience as a
probation officer and his supervision of numerous
individuals, he had an opinion about whether a long period of
incarceration for Mr. Walker would provide any assistance in
protecting the public. Mr. Jones opined:
I don't believe it would be beneficial in Mr.
Walker's case. I think he has shown, throughout his time
on supervised release, that he is amenable to supervision,
that it has been effective. I realize that there are similar
characteristics to when he-- when he committed the instant
offense that are similar now, but I, you know, unfortunately,
I don't have--I didn't have the opportunity to know
Mr. Walker before to really compare the differences between
the two, but I can say that, you know, he's shown a lot
of progress. He's shown that he can comply with the
conditions of supervision. And I would personally attribute
it to his dedication to his faith and his religion that seems
to have motivated him to make those positive changes in his
life. So, at this time, I don't think a custody sentence
would be beneficial in Mr. Walker's case. I think it
would be the opposite.
(Id. at 76-77.)
Skinner, Mr. Walker's mental health and substance abuse
counselor, also testified from Ohio. Ms. Skinner is a
clinical Christian counselor licensed through the National
Christian Counseling Association. (Id. at 77-78.)
Starting in November 2013, Ms. Skinner saw Mr. Walker for
counseling sessions about twice a month until he went to Teen
Challenge. (Id. at 78-79.) After Teen Challenge, Ms.
Skinner and Mr. Walker started meeting monthly. (Id.
at 78.) Ms. Skinner discussed how their counseling sessions
have changed over time. Before Teen Challenge, they would
address Mr. Walker's depression, anxiety, hopelessness,
fear of the future, and drug and alcohol addiction by working
through his past, working toward forgiveness, and attempting
to change his mindset. (Id. at 79.) Now, they focus
on strategies for dealing with life stressors and keeping him
accountable to his faith. (Id. at 79-80.)
up on her written statement to the court, summarized
supra, at 9-10, Ms. Skinner confirmed that Mr.
Walker has been completely sober since April 2014 and is
“completely effective in society at this point.”
(Id. at 81.) When asked what makes Mr. Walker
different today from May 2013, Ms. Skinner stated:
He absolutely is in a different position. When I first saw
him, he had a lot of mental health issues, including
depression, anxiety, hopelessness, helplessness. He had sleep
problems. There were many things contributing to his issues.
And now, if you look at him today, he's very stable, very
consistent. Prior to Teen Challenge, I would have said that
he was very inconsistent. He had anger issues. He had some
trouble dealing with his emotions. I noticed that one of the
people that testified that he used to work for said that a
month prior to the--I believe it was the month prior to the
robbery, that they noticed a change in his personality and
that he was much more agitated at work.
Those were the kind of things that we would look for now, and
we don't see any of that. Did I see agitation before Teen
Challenge? Yes, I did. He struggled. He struggled to manage
his life. He struggled to deal with any kind of stress, and
that would tie into the drug addiction and the alcohol
addiction which came out in the DUI right before he went to
Now we don't see any mood changes, we don't see any
personality changes. There's no health issues.
There's no money issues, you know, that we are aware of
that he isn't managing. There's no stressors, and
there's also no mental health issues. He is not
depressed. He is not anxious. He is just a very healthy
individual at this time.
(Id. at 82-83.) Ms. Skinner noted that Mr. Walker is
involved in church activities on Wednesday and Sunday and
addiction-related meetings on Friday nights. (Id. at
83.) She finds Mr. Walker has shifted from reactive to
“very proactive” about his mental health and
recovery, noting that he always contacts her to set up their
monthly appointment. (Id.) Ms. Skinner observed that
Mr. Walker's life has not been stress-free recently. His
wife went through three major surgeries and was out of work
during that time, and his step-daughter and her child were
also living with them for a time. (Id. at 84.) Mr.
Walker now has a strategy and support system for dealing with
his life stressors:
He handles situations appropriately by leaving the situation,
getting himself together, calming down, praying, doing
whatever he needs to do.
He also contacts me. He also contacts his pastor. He has
accountability in his life, which is a huge issue in the
world of recovery. If you have accountability, you're
much more likely to succeed, and he knows who he can go to,
when he's struggling, for help.
(Id. at 85.) Ms. Skinner confirmed that she sees no
warning signs from Mr. Walker's past in his life today.
(Id.) She opined that Mr. Walker's being away
from his current support system would “absolutely ...