Department of Justice Seal Department of Justice
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 2004
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
CRT
(202) 514-2008
TDD (202) 514-1888

APPEALS COURT REVERSES LOWER COURT IN CROSS BURNING DECISION
AND REMANDS FOR RE-SENTENCING


WASHINGTON, D.C - The Department of Justice today announced a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversing a sentencing decision in a criminal civil rights prosecution. In that case, United States v. May, the Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the lower court’s decision to depart downwards from the sentencing guidelines and to impose a minimal sentence on a defendant who had burned a cross with the purpose of intimidating a bi-racial couple. Assistant Attorney General Acosta and United States Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina Robert Conrad jointly argued the case.

“Cross burning has too long been a tool for the intimidation of racial and religious minorities,” said R. Alexander Acosta, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. “We are gratified by the court’s decision, which sends a clear message that offenses such as these should receive a sentence commensurate with their serious and offensive nature.”

“We are gratified by the court's rejection of the ‘there goes the neighborhood’ justification for racially-motivated acts of intimidation,” said Robert Conrad, United States Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina. “The way is paved for the pursuit of a deterrent sentence."

The case arose in 1999, when the defendant, Robert May, and an accomplice, Charles Carpenter, welcomed a bi-racial couple to their Gastonia, North Carolina neighborhood with a sign reading “No Trespassing - Especially N------.” After weeks of racial intimidation, they erected and burned a wooden cross near the couple’s home. They told investigating officers that they did so to “let the n----- know that he wasn’t welcome here.” May pleaded guilty to criminal charges, but while awaiting sentencing, repeatedly lied about ongoing drug use, and at sentencing denied the facts underlying his guilty plea.

The sentencing guidelines called for a sentence between 18 and 24 months. The district court, however, departed downwards, sentencing the defendant effectively to time served, concluding both that May had been provoked into the cross burning, and that his conduct was aberrant. The court based its departures in large part on testimony from May’s private investigator that the neighborhood declined in quality after the arrival of the African-American male. The court also adjusted the sentence downward by concluding that May had accepted responsibility for his actions.

The Fourth Circuit reversed both of the departures and the reduction. It held first that in no way had Sanders’ provoked May into a cross burning. The court specifically rejected the contention that cross burning was an appropriate and proportionate response to a generalized belief that conditions in the neighborhood deteriorated after the African-American male moved in. Second, the court concluded that May’s pattern of racial intimidation made clear that his conduct was not aberrant. Third, the Court found that he had not accepted responsibility for his guilt.

###

04-142