Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Garcia

United States District Court, S.D. New York

March 18, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
NAZARITH IVETTE GARCIA, Defendant.

SENTENCING OPINION

ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge.

On December 8, 2011, Nazarith Ivette Garcia (the "Defendant" or "Garcia") allocated to Count 1: Con racy to Defraud the U.S. with Respect to Claims (18 U.S.C. § 286), a Class C felony; Count 2: Bank Bribery of Bank Employees (18 U.S.C. § 215 (a) (1)), a Class B felony; Count 3: Conspiracy to Commit Fraud Connection with Identification Documents (18 U.S.C. § 1028 (a) (3) and (f)), a Class C felony; and Count 4: Aggravated Identity Theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a) (1)), a Class E felony. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant well be sentenced to a term of time se to be followed by three years' supervised re se for Counts 1 and 3, three years' supervised release for Count 2 and one year supervised release for Count 4, to run concurrently on all counts. Defendant is also required to pay a special assessment of $400.

Prior Proceedings

Defendant was named in a four-count indictment S110 CR 249-01(RWS) in the Southern strict of New York. Count 1 charges that from 2006 rough November 2009, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Defendant conspired to defraud the U.S. Department of Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, by obtaining and aiding to obtain, the payment and allowance of fraudulent claims. Count 2 charges that from 2006, through June 2007, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Defendant offered and gave money to a co-conspirator, who served as a manager of a Chase Bank branch in Bronx, and provided additional funds to be distributed to other branch employees, in return for this co-conspirator's assistance in cashing fraudulently-obtained tax refund checks. Count 3 charges that from 2006 through November 2009, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, Defendant conspired to possess with the intent to use unlawfully and transfer unlawfully five and more identification documents, authentication features, and se identification documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028 (a) (3). Count 4 charges that from 2006 through November 2009, in the Southern strict of New York and elsewhere, Defendant possessed and used identification information, including names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers of residents of Puerto Rico in preparing fraudulent tax returns using that identification information.

On December 8, 2011, the Defendant appeared before the Honorable Frank Maas and allocuted to her criminal conduct as charged, without the benefit of a plea agreement.

Sentencing is scheduled for March 20, 2014.

The Sentencing Framework

In accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), and the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. Crosby , 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2005), the sentence to be imposed was reached through consideration of all of the factors identified in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including the Advisory Guidelines:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the of se 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 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;
(3) the kinds of sentences available;
(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for -
(A) the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines...;
(5) any pertinent policy statement... [issued by the Sentencing Commission];
(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.

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). A sentencing judge is permitted to find all the facts appropriate for determining a sentence, whether that sentence is a so-called Guidelines sentence or not. See Crosby , 397 F.3d at 114-15.

The Defendant

The Court adopts the facts set forth in the Presentence Investigation Report ("PSR") with respect to Defendant's personal and family history.

The Offense Conduct

The following description draws from the PSR. The specific facts of underlying conduct are adopted ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.