United States v. Zenon Grzegorczyk
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15507
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- In 2012 defendant Zenon Grzegorczyk solicited undercover agents to murder multiple people, provided photos and identifying information, offered $5,000 per victim, and gave $3,000 down plus a duffle bag containing $45,000 cash and a 9mm pistol with ammunition.
- He told agents he would be in Poland during the murders to provide an alibi and wanted murders completed before an early-June wedding.
- A federal grand jury indicted him on three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1958 and one count under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); he pleaded guilty to one § 1958 count and the § 924(c) count.
- Sentencing calculations produced an adjusted offense level of 34 and Criminal History Category I, yielding a Guidelines range of 151–188 months, plus a mandatory consecutive 60 months for the § 924(c) conviction (total 211–248 months).
- The district court imposed 151 months on the § 1958 count plus a consecutive 60 months on the § 924(c) count (total 211 months). Grzegorczyk appealed his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1 (solicitation reduction) | N/A (government argued Guidelines correctly applied) | Grzegorczyk: § 2X1.1(b)(3)(A) entitles him to a 3-level reduction because the solicited murders were not completed/arrest occurred early | Court: § 2A1.5 expressly covers solicitation to commit murder; § 2X1.1(c)(1) bars its application and § 2A1.5 already accounts for uncompleted offenses — no reduction granted |
| Consideration of mental health and mitigation under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) | Grzegorczyk: court failed to properly weigh his mental-health, alcoholism, and trauma in mitigation | Government: court considered these factors and found them outweighed by seriousness and risk to public | Court: District court adequately considered and explained § 3553(a) factors; no procedural error |
| Substantive reasonableness of the within-Guidelines sentence | Grzegorczyk: sentence is substantively unreasonable given age, low recidivism risk, and rehabilitation needs | Government: within-Guidelines sentence presumptively reasonable given offense gravity and § 3553(a) factors | Court: Presumption stands; defendant failed to rebut it — sentence is reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Harper v. United States, 766 F.3d 741 (7th Cir.) (standard for review of Guidelines interpretation)
- Castro-Alvarado v. United States, 755 F.3d 472 (7th Cir.) (procedural-review standards and presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)
- Conley v. United States, 777 F.3d 910 (7th Cir.) (abuse-of-discretion standard for substantive reasonableness)
- Moreno-Padilla v. United States, 602 F.3d 802 (7th Cir.) (district court need not discuss every § 3553(a) factor in detail)
- Dean v. United States, 414 F.3d 725 (7th Cir.) (no checklist-style discussion required for § 3553(a) factors)
- Tahzib v. United States, 513 F.3d 692 (7th Cir.) (courts need not extensively address routine mitigation arguments)
- Shannon v. United States, 518 F.3d 494 (7th Cir.) (adequate statement of reasons suffices for § 3553(a) review)
- Dachman v. United States, 743 F.3d 254 (7th Cir.) (presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)
- Nitch v. United States, 477 F.3d 933 (7th Cir.) (defendant must show § 3553(a) factors render a Guidelines sentence unreasonable)
- Mykytiuk v. United States, 415 F.3d 606 (7th Cir.) (same point on rebutting presumption of reasonableness)