Date: 06-28-2024

Case Style:

United States of America v. Jeffray Wade Anderson, Jr.

Case Number: 23-CR-224

Judge: Sara E. Hill

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (Tulsa County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Tulsa

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

Description:

Tulsa, Oklahoma criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with first-degree murder in Indian Country.

Violation of: 18 USC 1151, 1153, and 1111: First Degree Murder in Indian Country
(1)
18 USC 1151, 1153, and 1111: Second Degree Murder in Indian Country
(1s)

Government’s Sentencing Memorandum

The Court should accept the parties’ plea agreement and sentence Jeffrey
Wade Anderson Jr. to 25 years imprisonment, within the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) range of 0
to 25 years, for the murder of Joe Burton. This sentence is reasonable and does not
undermine the purposes of sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). A sentence of 25
years’ imprisonment would provide a sentence sufficient, but not greater than
necessary, to serve the goals of sentencing. Specifically, a sentence at the top of the
stipulated range emphasizes the seriousness of Anderson’s offense, promotes respect
for the law, protects the public from his further crimes, and provides just punishment.
Relevant Facts

On June 27, 2023, at approximately 8:14 PM, Tulsa Police Department (TPD)
officers were dispatched to Riverside Park in reference to a stabbing. Police located
the victim, Joe Burton, lying unresponsive on the grass with an apparent stab wound
to the upper torso. Bystanders were attending to Burton and attempting to render
aid. Emergency medical personnel arrived and pronounced Burton deceased on
scene.

Multiple eyewitnesses provided the police with a description of the assailant, who
had fled prior to law enforcement arrival. About two hours after the stabbing, a TPD
officer observed Anderson walking in the vicinity of the crime scene. The officer
detained Anderson because he fit the description of the suspect. TPD conducted
show-up identifications on scene with some of the eyewitnesses.1 They all identified
Anderson as the person who stabbed and killed Mr. Burton.

Following these eyewitness identifications, TPD transported Anderson to the
police station to be interviewed. Detectives administered Miranda warnings, and
Anderson agreed to waive his rights and provide a statement. The government is
attaching as an exhibit to this sentencing memorandum a copy of Anderson’s
approximately 30-minute interview with police. The following is a brief summary.
Anderson stated that he was terminated from his job in early June 2023. He has a
minor daughter, and his rent was due in early July. He became tearful, telling police
he was sad because he wanted to work. He had been looking for another job without
any luck. He was recently engaged but the relationship ended in September of 2022.
He also explained that his boxing coach recently died.

1 A show-up identification is a procedure where a suspect is presented to a witness shortly
after a crime to confirm or eliminate them as a possible perpetrator. Show-ups are often
conducted when police are looking for a suspect who matches a description in a specific
area shortly after a crime is reported. Individuals who match the description and are found
in the area are detained and presented to the witness.

Continuing, Anderson stated he was by Riverside Park earlier in the day crying
about his murdered mother and talking to another male. A second male named
“Joe” with a guitar started talking to Anderson and said that he needed to be more
respectful. Anderson got upset and told Joe that if he wanted to call him
disrespectful, then Joe could come to his camp and tell him that to his face.
Anderson returned to his camp and hung out there for a while. He was unsure
about what Joe would do to him next. Anderson decided he was mad about being
called disrespectful. He yelled at Joe from across the lawn, “Hey Joe, I’m sorry
mother fucker, I must have thought you said I was being disrespectful!” Anderson
stated that he then ran “full blast” back towards to Joe, who was playing his guitar.
Upon reaching Joe, Anderson stabbed him with a blue Army issued Switchblade
knife. Anderson then yelled out to the multiple onlookers that someone should “call
the fucking morgue.” After the stabbing, Anderson stated that he placed the murder
weapon in his boot, which was back in his camp. Crime scene officers later located
the knife at that location.

Anderson stated Joe should not have called him disrespectful while he was crying
about his murdered mother. He had previously given Joe several of his knives and
said he was scared. However, he did not claim at any point during his statement that
Joe attacked him first. Anderson told the detective point blank, “Sir, I murdered that
man in public.”

An autopsy report confirmed that Burton sustained a single stab wound
approximately 4 cm deep to the left upper chest, perforating the left lung and left
pulmonary artery. The injury resulted in a collapsed left lung and accumulation of
blood in the left pleural cavity (the space between the chest wall and the lungs). The
medical examiner identified the stab wound as the cause of death and classified the
manner of death as homicide.

Argument

Anderson pled guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 1151, 1153, and 1111, Second
Degree Murder in Indian Country. Under § 3553(a), “[t]he Court shall impose a
sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes” of
sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The purposes are the following: “(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;
(C) 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.” 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).
In determining the sentence to be imposed, courts must consider the factors in §
3553(a), including (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history
and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed to
accomplish the purposes of sentencing; (3) the kinds of sentences available; [and] (4)
the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for the applicable category
of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the
guidelines.

Joe Burton was 71 years old and homeless at the time of his death. He also
apparently had personal struggles of his own in life; toxicology results revealed the
presence of illicit substances in his blood. However, there is absolutely no evidence
that Mr. Burton did or said anything on that fateful day to justify what Anderson did
to him. This murder was senseless and based on the flimsiest of provocations. A silly,
inconsequential disagreement over a perceived verbal slight caused Anderson to fly
into an uncontrolled rage, arm himself with a knife and take another man’s life.

Moreover, during his interview with police, Anderson displayed a complete lack
of care for what he had done. Noticing that he appeared to be showing no remorse
whatsoever for his actions, the detective asks Anderson at one point: “I’m just trying
to find out why you’re OK with stabbing him.” Anderson replied, “I’m trying to
figure out why you’re not.” This response evinces an extreme and downright
disturbing level of callousness. Anderson knew Burton had died; he told the detective
he was “sure” of it. Yet he did not express a single ounce of regret or sadness over it.

It was readily apparent that whenever Anderson cried during his interview, he was
only crying for himself. He shed no tears for the innocent person he killed.

The defendant’s guideline range on this second-degree murder is 168 to 210
months, and a 25-year sentence will exceed that range. Had this matter proceeded to
trial, Anderson could have potentially been convicted of first-degree murder and
faced a mandatory life sentence. The government agreed to dismiss the first-degree
murder charge as part of a negotiated plea agreement. Thus, in consideration for
dismissal of that higher charge, the government requests a sentence higher than the
guidelines on the negotiated reduced charge.

The defense has provided the prosecution with mental health records for
Anderson in reciprocal discovery, with the understanding that the defense may use
these materials to argue for mitigation in this matter. The government will reserve its
comments and responses regarding Anderson’s mental health records and history for
the date of sentencing.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should accept the parties’ plea agreement and
sentence Anderson to 25 years’ imprisonment, within the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) range.

DEFENDANT’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

Defendant Jeffrey Wade Alexander, by and through his counsel of record, Lindsey
Holguin, respectfully submits this Sentencing Memorandum to address issues relevant to the
3553(a) sentencing factors in this case.

Jeffrey Wade Anderson, Jr. (“Jeff”/Mr. Anderson”) was born on September 27, 1988, to
Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., and Melissa Cole. The two would have another child together, Jesse
Anderson. To provide for his family, Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., joined the Army, but once his time in
the service came to an end, Melissa no longer wanted to be part of a family and left him with the
two children. Her presence in their lives became limited to weekends and then tapered off for a
time. Melissa had previously been diagnosed with bi-polar disorder and struggled with her
mental health and substance use. Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., had full custody and raised the two boys by himself until he re-married and he and Besty Anderson had one daughter together, Jewel
Anderson. The two remained together for eighteen years. Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., then married
Leslie Anderson in 2014, and Jeff gained three stepsiblings, Onyx, Ridge, and Saylor.

In 2001, Melissa Cole had another son, Ian Cole, Jeff’s half-brother. Ian stayed with her
until he was three years old, when Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., observed some erratic behavior from
Melissa and made a referral to the Department of Human Services of Oklahoma. As a result of
the referral, Ian came to live with Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., and the family, for approximately five
years. Ian Cole also had mental health troubles, having a diagnosis for reactive attachment
disorder and then later a schizophrenia diagnosis.

Jeff describes his childhood in positive terms, having been raised, initially, by his father
with his brother Jesse, and then later with his half siblings and stepsiblings. It was childhood free
of abuse and the family was active in church. Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., was the minister at their
church and Jeff played guitar in the church band. Melissa was absent for a long period but the
two did re-establish a relationship in his teenage years and would want Jeff to come over so he
could help with taking care of Ian. Jeff first started drinking alcohol at the age of fifteen and first
started smoking marijuana when he was sixteen. On occasion, starting when Jeff was nineteen or
twenty, he and his mother would drink and smoke together. Jeff experimented with other
substances for short periods of time but continued to use alcohol and marijuana until his arrest.
When Jeff was seventeen years old, he began to exhibit some behaviors that caused
concern for Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., who had him evaluated at Laureate Psychiatric Clinic. This
affected his schooling and Jeff did not complete high school, however in 2008 he did receive his
General Education Development certificate. Jeff worked multiple jobs over the years, and
through those jobs he received training to become a plumber through the Plumbers and
Pipefitters Local 430 and became certified to operate a forklift.

In 2015, Jeff and Danielle King and a baby girl, Madison King-Anderson. Jeff threw
himself into being a father and could not have been happier. Life has a way of sneaking up on
you, and in the next year Jeff would receive the most devasting news. On September 27, 2016,
his birthday, Jeff received a call from his brother, Jesse, that his mother was killed by his half-
brother Ian Cole.1 It took some time for Jeff to pull himself together after this news but he knew
he had to so he could provide for his daughter. In 2019, Jeff was awarded custody of Madison.
Danielle was struggling with her own addictions and was unable to provide a safe environment
for Madison. In 2021, Danielle lost her battle against substance abuse and passed away.

Around Christmas of 2023, Jeffrey Anderson, Sr., noticed that Jeff’s mental health was
taking a turn. While Jeff was taking some of his mental health medication, it did not appear to be
as effective as it was planned to be. Jeff tried to do the best he could, but he was struggling to
maintain employment and the constant worry of being able to provide and take care of Madison
and himself was suffocating. In June of 2023, Jeff was unemployed and knew he would not be
able to come up with the money for rent. He felt trapped, but even though he was unsure of how
his future would unfold, his focus of taking care of Madison never wavered. On June 27, 2023,
Jeff called and planned to have her stay with them while Jeff planned to go over to the park on
Riverside to try and come up with a plan, or at the very least find some quiet in the storm. Jeff
went to the pavilion area at 41st Street and Riverside and had planned to camp in the area. He
began to talk with another man that was there, and Jeff was talking about the loss of his mother
and was visibly upset. During this conversation, Mr. Burton, who was homeless at the time and
staying in that area of the park, made some comments to Jeff about how Jeff was “being
disrespectful” while Jeff was discussing his mother. This deeply upset Jeff, and he walked away
from Mr. Burton and went back to where he had set up his camp. But with his already heightened
emotional state, and not being properly medicated, this comment was the final thing to break
Jeff. He grabbed and knife and went back over to Mr. Burton and stabbed him one time. The
knife hit the pulmonary artery and perforated the lung making it a fatal wound.

Jeff went back to the area where he had set up camp and when he came back out onto the
paved path, there was a police officer there and Jeff was taken into custody. While being taken
into custody, Jeff repeatedly said he was sorry while hyperventilating and sweating. When he
gets into the interview room with police, his emotions seem to jump quickly from one to the
next, exhibiting the disorganized thinking and behavior common in unmedicated
schizophrenics.2

Statement of Facts

On June 28, 2023, Mr. Anderson was initially charged by Complaint with Murder in
Indian Country in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1151, 1153, and 1111. (Dkt. #1) On July 10, 2023,
the government filed an Indictment for the same charge. (Dkt. 17). On January 12, 2024, defense
counsel informed the Court that the parties had reached a plea agreement, and the case was
referred to Magistrate Judge Huntsman for change of plea. On January 22, 2024, Mr. Anderson
pled guilty to an Information pursuant to a plea agreement pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) where both parties agreed that a sentencing range of 0-25 years is an
appropriate disposition in this case. Mr. Anderson has timely and fully accepted responsibility.
Based upon a total offense level of 35 and a Criminal History Category of I, the advisory
Guidelines imprisonment range is 168-210 months, or 14-17.5 years.

Factors for the Court to Consider

Under federal law, the Sentencing Guidelines are one of a number of factors which a
sentencing court must consider in reaching a sentence that is no more severe than is required to
fulfill the goals of sentencing. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 2045 (2005). The factors
for the court to consider are outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and the goals of sentencing can be
found in subsection (2) of that section. Some of the factors to consider in tailoring the minimum
sufficient sentence are:

1. the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the
defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1);

2. the kinds of sentences available. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(3);

3. the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar
records who have been found guilty of similar conduct. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6); and
4. the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(7).

The enumerated intent of Section 3553 is for the court to impose a sentence that is sufficient
but not greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of sentencing. 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a)(2) state that such purposes are:

(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;

(C) 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.

The United States Supreme Court directs sentencing district courts to look beyond the
crime and tailor a sentence for the convicted person. See Pepper v. United States, 131 S. Ct.
1229 (2011). “It has been uniform and constant in the federal sentencing tradition for the
sentencing judge to consider every convicted person as an individual and every case as a unique study in the human failings that sometimes mitigate, sometimes magnify, the crime and the punishment to ensue.” Id. at 1239. Trial courts “are allowed to contextually evaluate each
§3553(a) factor, including those facts relevant guideline(s) already purport to take into account,
even if the facts of the case are less than extraordinary.” United States v. Sanchez-Leon, 764 F.3d 1248, 1263 (10th Cir. 2014), quoting United States v. Smart, 518 F.3d 800, 808 (10th Cir. 2008).

Schizophrenia is a brain disorder that can affect how people think, feel, or behave. With
treatment, both medication and counseling, symptoms of the disorder will greatly improve. Jeff
will need to continue his mental health treatment during his incarceration. Over the years Jeff
saw several mental health providers who came to different diagnosis and prescribed different
medications. The regimen that he has been placed on while incarcerated at David L. Moss is
working and should be considered the baseline of treatment for him going forward while
incarcerated. Jeff needs counseling and therapy for depression and PTSD. He has experienced so much loss in his life that he needs the help of therapists to process and deal with that grief and pain. Jeff’s use of illicit substances to cope with his symptoms is not shocking, but he has started taking the steps needed to no longer use alcohol and marijuana as a crutch. After getting on the correct medication, Jeff has used his time to try and better himself, and though there are limited resources within the county jail, he was able to complete a substance abuse program. (Exhibit #1). Jeff would like to continue substance abuse treatment while incarcerated. Lastly, Jeff has shown he has a willingness and desire to work and would like to participate in vocational training programs while incarcerated.

Conclusion

Pursuant to the goals discussed above, a sentence at the low end of the advisory guideline
sentencing range within Zone D of the Sentencing Table is sufficient, but not greater than
necessary, to comply with the purposes set forth in Section 3553(a)(2). For the forgoing reasons, the Court should accept the parties’ plea agreement and impose a sentence within the advisory guideline range of 180 months imprisonment followed by a five-year term of supervised release.

Outcome: Defendant pleaded guilty.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: