Articles Posted in Federal Crimes

Street level drug distribution cases in Maryland are typically handled in state criminal court, as the Feds have traditionally earmarked their manpower and money only for large and complex drug trafficking rings. Times appear to be changing though due to a substance that is quickly becoming public enemy number one, and is causing the feds to expand their role in street and mid level drug trade. Fentanyl has been around for decades after first arriving in the 1960’s as a popular and potent intravenous pain reliever. It then became popular in the 90’s as a method of treating chronic pain in the form of skin patches. The drug would slowly absorb into the bloodstream through the skin, as the patches could effectively deliver medication for hours. There were cases of fentanyl abuse back in the 90’s; those seeking a high realized that the patches could be opened, which provided access to larger quantities of the medicine that could be ingested at once. This form of fentanyl abuse was even discussed in a popular Carl Hiassen novel, though it never really made headlines. In 2005 to 2007 the drug began to appear on the DEA’s radar after causing over 1,000 overdose deaths in a two-year span, but still it hardly became a national story.

Fast-forward 10 years, and the narrative has changed drastically. In 2016 fentanyl passed oxycodone and heroin as the leading cause of overdose deaths in the country. Fentanyl is now right up there with heroin as priority number one for law enforcement officers, and it might just be alone at the top. The potency of the drug, which is 80-100 times greater than Morphine is to blame for the deadly statistics, but potency alone does not tell the full story. Fentanyl has always been extremely deadly and now it’s cheap and widely available. It is manufactured in labs overseas and after arrival in the U.S. is mixed or cut with other drugs such as heroin to reduce costs while not sacrificing effect. In most cases the users and even the street level dealers have no idea that their product is laced with fentanyl. It is truly a silent killer, and federal law enforcement is taking notice.

Two weeks ago the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced that an Anne Arundel County man was sentenced to almost five years in prison for possession with intent to distribute over 40 grams of fentanyl. Law enforcement executed a search warrant of the defendant’s residence back in 2017 and the search yielded more than 6,000 pills of the deadly narcotic as well as cash and Bitcoin mining equipment. The defendant apparently used the cryptocurrency to purchase 10,000 fentanyl pills on the dark web. In this press release following sentencing the U.S. Attorney announced that drug traffickers dealing in fentanyl face increased odds of federal prosecution, and that federal law enforcement will pursue those involved with dark web sales of the drug. Last week the federal prosecutor’s office in Baltimore announced yet another fentanyl related case, this time it was the indictment of six individuals in Hagerstown alleged to have been involved in the distribution of as much as two kilograms of the narcotic. Some of the Washington County defendants also face firearms charges after multiple loaded guns were seized. Two of the defendants have prior felony convictions that prohibit them from possessing firearms under state and federal laws. Under federal law possession of a firearm by a convicted felon or other prohibited individual can result in a ten-year minimum mandatory sentence, while the Maryland version carries a five-year minimum.

Three Eastern Shore men were recently sentenced in the Baltimore City federal courthouse for their roles in an organized scheme to steal thousands of dollars of chicken parts and transport them for sale in New York City. According to the plea agreement the three men participated in this theft scheme over the course of eight months beginning in April of 2015. Two of the men were employees at a chicken processing plant in Cordova, Maryland, while the third was a truck driver for a shipping company that was contracted by the plant to transport its products. The two employees devised a scheme to bypass the plant’s inventory system and load pallets of frozen chicken onto their co-defendant’s truck. The truckloads bound for New York carried a combination of properly scanned pallets that would be sold to legitimate customers and unscanned pallets that would be sold illegally, with the three men keeping the profits for themselves.

In December of 2015 another chicken plant employee observed the two co-defendant employees loading unscanned pallets of frozen chicken onto the co-defendant driver’s truck. After questioning the two co-defendants he then reported his observations to a supervisor who notified the trucking company. The driver apparently ignored an order from the trucking company to return to the plant, and brazenly continued on to New York. GPS locators on the truck showed that the driver made the legitimate deliveries, but also stopped at unauthorized locations to sell the unscanned chicken. On top of all this, law enforcement officers recovered social media posts of the truck driver in the cab of the truck flashing cash he had received from selling the stolen chicken, and text conversations between co-defendants about marketing their stolen product.

The youngest of the three, a 39-year old from Easton, was sentenced to 7 months in jail followed by three years of supervised probation. A few days earlier the 43-year old defendant from Easton received a year in jail followed by probation, and the 58-year old truck driver from Delaware received four months jail with probation upon his release. The three defendants were also ordered to pay almost $250,000 in criminal restitution as part of their sentence. This figure was estimated by the chicken plant’s insurance company that is now on the hook for a quarter million dollars.

A former Prince George’s County delegate has been sentenced to four years in federal prison followed by three years of probation for engaging in bribery and conspiracy while in office.  The sentence was announced by federal prosecutors after a hearing at the U.S. District Court in Greenbelt more than six months after the former state lawmaker’s trial.  Back in March a federal jury found the ex-delegate guilty of four counts of bribery and one count of conspiracy for accepting thousands of dollars from various business owners in exchange for favorable treatment. At sentencing the presiding judge was informed that the shamed delegate also stole over $100,000 in campaign funds during his 14-year tenure as an elected official.

According to evidence presented by the government the former delegate conspired with members of the county liquor board and liquor store owners to vote favorably on issues that would increase the profitability of the store owners.  This included votes on proposals to establish additional permits to sell alcohol on Sundays, and for these favorable votes the former lawmaker received at least $19,000 in cash payments. In reaching a sentencing decision the judge not only considered evidence presented during the two-week trial, but also evidence of wrongdoing that the government presented at the sentencing hearing. The former lawmaker was not brought to trial on charges of theft or misconduct in office for stealing campaign funds, but it undoubtedly factored into the judges decision to sentence the delegate to four years in jail.  The former delegate and his legal team did not attempt to deny the government’s claim that he stole the funds, which likely means there was some sort of agreement between the parties beforehand.  The government probably felt it would not be necessary to bring the former lawmaker to trial twice, as long at the sentencing judge was aware and considered the additional misconduct.

While it may seem unfair to a layperson, prosecutors are permitted to introduce evidence of wrongdoing at sentencing that was not presented at trial. The traditional rules of evidence do not apply during sentencing hearings, which means nearly everything about the defendant is fair game. The prosecution is still bound by ethical rules preventing them from informing the court about rumors and unfounded accusations, but the defendant’s character is always tested at a sentencing hearing.  The flip side of the coin is that the defense is rarely limited as to what it can bring to the court’s attention during this phase of the proceeding.  Defendants may call numerous witnesses to testify on their behalf, and these witnesses are not subjected to traditional cross-examination.  While every judge operates differently, it is usually beneficial to have family, friends and other members of the community to testify for a defendant at sentencing.  Prosecutors spend the entire trial attacking the defendant, who most of the time is advised to exercise his or her 5th Amendment right to remain silent. Sentencing is generally the only time where the judge can learn more about the defendant as a person, rather than a criminal suspect.