Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 226

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.
LESLIE ERIN CURTIS

)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:16-CR-50027-001

DEFENDANTS SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

Leslie Erin Curtis (Leslie), a 45 year old woman, approaches the Court with severe
remorse in this case. Not remorse stemming from being caught, but remorse for committing such
a serious crime. She realizes that she was involved in a conspiracy with Allen Gailliot, a man that
she has known for several years and has come to know as somewhat of a safe haven as her
history is full of bad relationships and crimes against her perpetrated in those relationships. In
this sentencing Memorandum, she will explore the various factors in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2) and
how they apply to Leslies situation. She accepts the fact that in her conspiracy, she is subject to a
penalty for all of the methamphetamine that was part of the conspiracy, regardless where it was
found or in whose control. She also accepts the fact that this is not her first time before a court
and that her history in the criminal system is of great impact here. However, she also offers the
mitigation indicated herein and moves the Court for a sentence in the 140 month range as an
appropriate sentence that will accomplish and comply with 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2). She asks for
this sentence partly because of the extremely harsh penalties reserved for those involved with the
controlled substance of Methamphetamine, and the concept that the methods that resulted in the
present guidelines are flawed in favor of higher sentences than should be the result of the 18
U.S.C. 3553(a)(2) factors.

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 227

While the Sentencing Guidelines, recommend a range of 210 to 240 months, Leslie asks
that the Court consider who she is and where she came from to arrive in this very serious trouble.
Leslie was born to an unknown Mother who gave her up for adoption pre-birth. She was
adopted by Thomas and Janice Zachary (Incidentally, Thomas passed from this life on November
27, 2016 while Ms Curtis was awaiting sentencing in the instant case) She has two siblings who
were the natural children of the Zacharys. Her adoptive parents disclosed her adoption to her at
an early age, but treated her as a natural child. As much as they tried to hold her as a natural
child, Leslie still perceived differences. She graduated from Bear Creek High School in
Lakewood, Colorado in 1989. At that time she decided that she would pursue a college education
and matriculated to McNeese State University in Lake Charles, LA, receiving a fast-pitch softball
scholarship. She attended there for two years majoring in Business with a minor in Spanish.
After her time at school she returned to Lakewood, CO where she met her first husband
Craig Waller. They had one son, William. Their marriage lasted five years after which she moved
to the home of her parents in Cheyenne Wyoming. There she met and married Brian Curtis, a
Captain in the U.S. Air Force. They had one son, Daniel. After five years that marriage also
failed.
She and Brian had moved to Bentonville, AR. After they divorced, she met and married
her third husband, Tim Nichols. They were married for 5 years. Shortly after the marriage to Tim
Nichols, she was arrested on a charge of manufacturing Methamphetamine. Her relationship with
Mr. Nichols had begun her addiction to Methamphetamine. Also, during this same time, she had
started and developed a fairly successful business doing construction cleaning. Her business
cleaned new construction homes in preparation for sale.

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 228

During this time, her personal and professional life suffered greatly due to her increasing
drug use. She placed herself in situations where she was severely abused by men she had hooked
up with. On two separate occasions she was raped. She has had guns held to her head, she has
been beaten severely, and overall was headed to an early death at the hands of her drug providers.
When she got out of prison in 2010, she returned to her parents home in Wyoming where
she gained a CDL license and finally felt that she was looking forward to a promising future. She
then met Jeff Hawkenberry who reintroduced her to Meth. He abused her severely during their
year long association. The two of them moved to South Dakota where she continued to use meth.
She had several short relationships with various men who all also abused her in various ways.
She tried to straighten her life out by turning herself in to her parole officer in Arkansas
who sentenced her to three months in the TVP program. She was trying to leave drugs behind her
when she again fell in with the wrong person who started her again in the drug world. It was
during this time that she met Allan Gailliot. Gailliot basically offered her a lifestyle where she
could be physically safe from abuse and use drugs and at the same time only needed to be his
eye-candy as opposed to just a punching bag. Their relationship was not an intimate one, but it
gave them both things that they wanted. He had a good looking young woman to on his arm
when he wished and he offered her in return safety from the beatings and rape that she had
suffered with others as well as a seemingly never ending supply of drugs to use when she wished.
To properly apply the factors, it is necessary to examine the comparative rectitude of
Leslie and Gailliot. Gailliot had connections in the drug world. Earlier in his life, he had been
involved in the drug trade in California. He had formed the connections to be able to get large
quantities of drugs shipped to him when he wished. As should be noted in the police reports, all
packages of drugs were sent from a source in California to Alan Gailliot. This is because he, not

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 229

Leslie, had the connections to be able to acquire these drugs. For Leslie, this was a perfect set-up.
She was able to have and use drugs while her only responsibility was to look good on his arm
and enjoy the proceeds of the situation.
Leslies addictive personality also surfaced in the casino. Casino owners welcome the slot
machine players who come to them consistently. Slot machines are truly among the most
addictive behaviors that exist. As it happened, Leslie was one of a very few slot players that did
well at it. For a period of approximately 9 months, she consistently won more than she lost and
by the time she was arrested, she had some $64,000 in cash, mostly from her slot machine play.
The winnings only avoided the need for her to work at a regular job to support her habit and
lifestyle. Between her slot winnings and her drugs, she sank further into her addictions.
While it is true that Leslie told the police that she was the CFO of the operation, it
should be explored why she made that statement and just what the operation was. In retrospect,
she actually does not remember making that statement but is sure that she did. To be sure, if she
was the CFO, Alan Gailliot was the CEO. The difference at the time of arrest was that Mr.
Gailliot knew, presumably from an extensive criminal history, that he should maintain his right
to remain silent while she was interested in finding a way out of the trouble in which she found
herself.
As drug enforcement officers are readily prone to do, at the time of Leslies arrest, they
asked her if she could help them and thereby Help herself. Leslie was high on
methamphetamine at the time and thinks that she would have felt a definite need to convince
them that she could be of sufficient assistance that she could positively affect the outcome of her
case. The fact that she was high on Methamphetamine obviously clouded her ability to correctly
communicate her abilities in this area. Her claims of being able to get large quantities in short

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 230

periods were truly braggadocio in an attempt to convince officers that she could be of service.
Leslie was reasonably sure that she could convince Gailliot to give up the source in
California if she tried. What she did not know but came to understand was that the officers were
only interested in criminals in Arkansas or coming to Arkansas. Crimes committed in another
jurisdiction were of little use unless they were sufficiently connected to Arkansas so that
jurisdiction and arrest could be accomplished here. Thus her attempts to be of service went for
naught.
The operation to which Leslie referred was the lifestyle and relationship that she and
Gailliot had, not just the drug trade, but also in their personal lives. As example, when she got
together with Gailliot, he had tremendously messed up teeth. She took him to the dentist and
arranged for him to have his teeth pulled and for him to be fitted with implant anchored false
teeth. She encouraged him to seek treatment of other medical problems at the VA Hospital in
Fayetteville. She also took care of making sure that the rent was paid, and in fact paid it many
months ahead. She was the financial controller in the household.
As to the drugs in the household, it is clear that Leslie knew that there was a considerable
quantity of drugs in the home and also in the home to which they were in the process of moving.
Because of the conspiracy between her and Gailliot, she also accepts responsibility for the drugs
that were found in the storage facility. At the time, her main concern was not the quantity of
drugs that were present but that there were sufficient drugs for her to use when she desired. In an
analysis of the comparative rectitude between Leslie and Gailliot, it should be noted that when
the officers searched the residences, they found many incriminatory notes, logs, and other indicia
of the drug trade, which were all in Gailliots writing. All cell phone evidence was extracted
from Gailliots phone, not Leslies. All packages of drugs were addressed to Gailliot. The

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 231

entrance code to West Side Storage was Gailliots birthday so that he could easily remember it
and the key to the individual lock was on Gailliots key chain. All payments for the storage
facility were made from Galliots bank account. To be sure, however, they were both engaged in
the business of methamphetamine which indeed makes this a true conspiracy with two willing
participants.
The Governments Attorney correctly pointed out that a female, self described apparently
as the Defendants daughter called West Side Storage to gain access which prompted the owner
of West Side Storage to report the incident to the police. That same person stated that she wanted
access so that she could retrieve her Fathers dollar bill collection before it was stolen. Indeed,
the person who called was Angel Gailliot, the daughter of the co-defendant, not a daughter of
Leslie. Leslie does not have a daughter, only two sons who are not involved in this case.
The mandate of 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) is, of course, for the court to impose a sentence
sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes of sentencing set forth in
paragraph 2 of that same statute. In United States v. Hunt, 459 F.3d 1180, 1182 (11th Cir. 2006),
the court summarized the factors that must be considered:
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics
of the defendant;
(2) the need for the sentence imposed-(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to
provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and
(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training,
medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;
(3) the kinds of sentences available;
(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established . . .;
(5) any pertinent [Sentencing Commission] policy statement . . .;
(6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with
similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; and
(7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 232

It is the Guidelines treatment of methamphetamine that appears to be most responsible for

the disproportionally high Guidelines range. Indeed, it does produce a range far greater than is
necessary to comply with the goals of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2). Mr Alfaro
has done a wonderful job of presenting the problems with the way that the guidelines treat
methamphetamine. Leslie agrees with his analysis and does not intend to repeat Mr. Alfaros
arguments except to say that she adopts and concurs in his argument as presented in Mr.
Gailliots Sentencing Memorandum and references it here as if set out in this memorandum
The Defendant, Leslie Curtis, pursuant to the decision in United States v. Booker, 543
U.S. 220 (2005), requests this Court to impose a sentence that is sufficient but not greater than
necessary to comply with the goals of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2). 18 U.S.C.
3553(a). Those goals, the consideration of the nature and circumstances of Leslies offense,
3553(a), and the other factors set forth in the statute support a sentence of less than the 210 to
240 months called for by the United States Sentencing Guidelines.
This Court, in arriving at a sentencing decision in this case, must, of course, consult the
United States Sentencing Guidelines. See United States v. Munoz, 430 F.3d 1357, 1369 (11th Cir.
2005). Nonetheless, courts must also consider the other factors set out in 3553(a). Indeed, in
some instances, the guidelines may have little persuasive force in light of some of the other
3553(a) factors:
Although "judges must still consider the sentencing range contained in the
Guidelines, . . . that range is now nothing more than a suggestion that may or may
not be persuasive . . . when weighed against the numerous other considerations
listed in [ 3553(a) ]." Id. at 787 (Stevens, J., dissenting). Indeed, as one district
judge has already observed,
the remedial majority in Booker [] direct[s] courts to consider all of
the 3553(a) factors, many of which the guidelines either reject or
ignore. For example, under 3553(a)(1) a sentencing court must

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 233

consider the "history and characteristics of the defendant." But

under the guidelines, courts are generally forbidden to consider the
defendant's age, his education and vocational skills, his mental and
emotional condition, his physical condition including drug or
alcohol dependence, his employment record, his family ties and
responsibilities, his socio-economic status, his civic and military
contributions, and his lack of guidance as a youth. The guidelines'
prohibition of considering these factors cannot be squared with the
3553(a)(1) requirement that the court evaluate the "history and
characteristics" of the defendant.
United States v. Ranum, 353 F. Supp. 2d 984, 986 (E.D.Wis.2005) (citations
omitted). Thus, mitigating circumstances and substantive policy arguments that
were formerly irrelevant in all but the most unusual cases are now potentially
relevant in every case.
United States v. Glover, 431 F.3d 744, 752-753 (11th Cir. 2005) (Tjoflat, J. specially concurring).
See also, United States v. Huerta-Rodriguez, 355 F. Supp.2d 1019, 1023 (D. Neb. 2005) (postBooker, the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) requires the sentencing court to regard the guidelines
ranges as one of the many factors to consider in determining the sentence).
Under the structure of the guidelines, Leslie faces the same sentence she would face had
she been the only figure in the conspiracy. Such a sentence, though would fall short of the need
to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants. . . who have been found guilty of
similar conduct. 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(6). The fact is that the Guidelines, while proclaiming the
goal of uniformity, sometimes fail to do accomplish that goal when the sentence is based
primarily on drug quantity. The Constitution Project recognized as much.1 The Projects
Sentencing Initiative report concludes that the Sentencing Guidelines place excessive emphasis
on quantifiable factors such as monetary loss and drug quantity, and not enough emphasis on
1

It is a group which describes itself as a bipartisan nonprofit organization that seeks

consensus on controversial legal and constitutional issues thorough a unique combination of
scholarship and activism, www.constitutionproject.org/index.cfm, Its Sentencing Initiative Project
includes such preeminent conservative jurists as United States Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito
and United States District Court Judge Paul Cassel, author of the decision in United States v. Wilson,
350 F.Supp.2d 910 (D. Utah 2005).

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 234

other considerations such as the defendants role in the criminal conduct.2 In its report Fifteen
Years of Guidelines Sentencing: An Assessment of How Well the Federal Criminal Justice
System is Achieving the Goals of Sentencing Reform, at 50, the United States Sentencing
Commission recognized the criticism of the over-reliance on drug quantity: Drug quantity has
been called a particularly poor proxy for the culpability of low-level offenders, who may have
contact with significant amounts of drugs, but who do not share in the profits or decisionmaking. The end result is that the Guidelines produce sentences that, while uniform by the
standards of the Guidelines, sometimes sentence those minimally involved much like those who
are central figures in the crime.3
The goals set forth in 3553(a)(2) consist of the need for the sentence imposed
(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law,
and to provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and
(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational,
training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective
manner
It is hard to be precise in meeting these goals. Leslie knows and accepts that this court will
necessarily be imposing a significant sentence. Accordingly, whether the sentence falls within the
Guidelines range of 210 to 240 months or is closer to her suggested sentence of 140 months the
sentence will surely promote the goals of reflecting the seriousness of the offense, affording
adequate deterrence, and protecting the public. The point, though, is that when the other factors
2

http://www.constitutionproject.org/article.cfm?messageID=101.

Even the uniformity of sentencing under the Guidelines is probably overstated. According
to the United States Sentencing Commissions 2003 Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics,
which presents the most current statistics available, the average sentence in the Northern District of
Florida for drug trafficking offenses was 64% higher than the national average (131.5 months vs.
80.1 months).

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 235

of 3553(a) are considered - in particular, the nature and circumstances of the offense (
3553(a)(1)) and the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities ( 3553(a)(7))- it is
apparent that the goals of federal sentencing can be accomplished with a sentence less than that
called for by the Guidelines.
It should also be noted that no firearms were used in any of the crimes for which Leslie
has been charged, either here or in her history. She is an addict. She is not a violent person.
While she does have a criminal history that places her in a category V, her prior crimes are
actually more indicative of her drug usage problem coupled with her addictive personality.
Leslie is anxious to be able to participate in drug rehabilitation programs and vocational
programs that may be available to her at the BOP. Her lack of freedom and her sobriety and
training during her incarceration are well served with her suggested sentence which she is very
hopeful will make her a good citizen upon her return to society. And, as many studies have
pointed out, older more mature people are less likely to recidivate, so the goal of fashioning a
person who is ready to reenter society is also well served by her suggested sentence.
Leslie Erin Curtis requests that this Court impose just such a sentence.
Respectfully Submitted,
Leslie Erin Curtis, Defendant
By:

/s/ Herbert C. Southern

Herbert C. Southern, AR 99105
THE SOUTHERN LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C.
P.O. Box 4086
Fayetteville, AR 72702
Voice 479-582-5800
Fax
479-582-5805

Case 5:16-cr-50027-TLB Document 41

Filed 11/30/16 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 236

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I Herbert C. Southern, certify that the pleading above has been filed on this November 30,
2016 in the ECF system which will notify all attorneys in this case of its filing and allow a copy
to be provided.

/s/ Herbert C. Southern

Herbert C. Southern