Sentencing Memorandum by USA as to Alexandra Acosta — USA v. Alexandra Acosta (Dkt. 116, S.D. Fla.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 0:23-cr-60170-RNS · Doc. 116 · 2024-08-21 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60170-CR-SCOLA 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
 
 
 
vs. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ALEXANDRA ACOSTA, 
 
 
 
       Defendant. 
                                    / 
 
UNITED STATES’ SENTENCING MEMORANDUM AND RESPONSE IN 
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DOWNWARD VARIANCE 
 
 
Respect for the law. General deterrence. Public trust. These should be the 
focus of Defendant Alexandra Acosta’s sentencing. There is no dispute that 
Acosta had a good career, excelled in her work on many occasions, and has a 
family that she cares for and likewise cares for her. But nearly all defendants 
come to sentencing with the unfortunate circumstance of hurting their family 
members by being separated by incarceration—a result of their own conduct. 
Here, it is Acosta who is responsible now for the position she is in and the 
position she put her family in. Acosta has lied multiple times before, during, and 
after her crime—including while under oath at trial.  
Respect for the law. General deterrence. Public trust. These are the basis 
for the undersigned’s recommendation of a low-middle-of-the-guidelines term of 
incarceration of 10 months. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 116   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2024   Page 1 of 5

 
2 
 
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 
A. 
Deterrence and Respect for the Law  
 
While specific deterrence may be accomplished by the conviction and the 
attendant loss of Acosta’s career in law enforcement, general deterrence and 
respect for the law require more. Indeed, the substantial outlay in resources 
needed to catch one fraud, no matter the loss amount, warrants harsher 
punishments than those necessary to specifically deter a defendant from future 
conduct. The public needs to have an unwavering respect for the law created by 
serious punishments for criminal conduct. And, here, where the Defendant was 
someone who held a position of power and trust in the community—a position 
that had her enforcing the laws—it is imperative that society sees her punished 
with equal application of the law.  
B. 
Nature of the Offense 
This is a serious offense. The PPP was a lifeline to failing businesses 
affected by a once-in-a-century public health crisis. For every fraudulent loan 
extracted from the government, there is a real business on the other end that 
could not get that money. In fact, that reality is so serious that this Court 
excluded it from the jury’s consideration.  
Moreover, frauds in general take a tremendous outlay of resources to 
prosecute—especially at trial requiring out-of-state witnesses. Indeed, the total 
loss amounts rarely diminish the amount of work that goes into investigating 
and prosecuting a fraud case. Here, Acosta’s relatively lower $20,180 loss 
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 116   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2024   Page 2 of 5

 
3 
 
amount weighs only in her favor in that it mitigates the level of greed attributable 
to the crime.  
C. 
Similarly Situated Defendants 
To date, the United States has charged 21 other Broward County Sheriff’s 
(BSO) deputies and firefighters. Three have been tried (including Acosta)—two 
found guilty by juries and one scheduled for retrial. The remainder have pleaded 
guilty (or are proceeding by information) and have either been sentenced or are 
awaiting sentencing. Below is a chart of the sentenced BSO defendants, as of the 
date of this filing, for this Court’s reference. The chart is organized by length of 
sentence.    
Case No. 
Plea 
or 
Trial 
Loss Amount 
Sentence 
23-60203-CR-Bloom 
(Cohn) 
Trial 
$31,108 
7 months’ imprisonment, 3 
years’ supervised release, 
$2,000 fine. 
24-60003-CR-
Williams 
Plea 
$168,248.41 
10 
months’ 
home 
confinement, 
5 
years’ 
supervised 
release, 
$5,500 
fine, 
and 
500 
hours 
of 
community service 
23-60193-CR-Huck 
Plea 
$42,052.13 
5 years’ probation, 8 months’ 
home confinement 
23-60172-CR-
Martinez 
Plea 
$33,607 
5 years’ probation 
23-60182-CR-WPD 
Plea 
$44,839 
3 years’ supervised release 
with 
6 
months’ 
home 
confinement 
23-60171-CR-Bloom 
Plea 
$61,978.66 
Time 
served, 
3 
years’ 
supervised release, 6 months’ 
home confinement 
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 116   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2024   Page 3 of 5

 
4 
 
23-60169-CR-Altman Plea 
$43,985 
3 years’ probation with 60 
days home confinement 
23-60191-CR-Bloom 
Plea 
$20,832 
2 years’ probation 
23-60185-CR-Moore 
Plea 
$18,792.98 
2 years’ probation 
23-60189-CR-Moore 
Plea 
$20,810 
2 years’ probation 
23-60184-CR-Altman Plea 
$18,332 
2 years’ probation 
23-60174-CR-
Williams 
Plea 
$19,790 
1 year probation and 100 
hours community service 
23-80168-CR-
Cannon 
Plea 
$20,380 
1 year probation and $5,000 
fine 
23-60197-CR-Smith 
Plea 
$36,040 
1 year probation 
23-60192-CR-Gayles 
Plea 
$20,832 
1 year probation 
 
Acosta’s sentence should be considered in context of the other similarly 
situated BSO deputy found guilty by a jury of her peers and sentenced to seven 
months’ imprisonment by Senior District Judge Cohn. Notably, in that case, 
there was no enhancement for obstruction. Thus, here, the current 
recommendation for 10 months’ incarceration accounts for this distinction. And 
the Court should consider the erosion of the benefit to those that plead guilty, 
quickly, or otherwise, if it varies downward for Acosta following a trial where she 
lied on the stand.  
D. 
History and Characteristics 
 
Acosta’s guidelines are reduced because of her zero criminal history status 
under USSG §4C1.1. This is important to keep in mind for context when 
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 116   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2024   Page 4 of 5

 
5 
 
considering a sentence in correlation with the history and characteristics of a 
defendant because §4C1.1 has effectively baked a portion of that 3553(a) factor 
into the reduced calculated guidelines. Otherwise, the United States does not 
contest that Acosta served as public servant for many years and has letters of 
support and a family.  
The real issue is that it is Acosta’s position of public trust that requires 
more accountability. Acosta knew better when she committed the crimes. Acosta 
knew better when she withheld material information from the United States at 
her proffer. Acosta knew better when she lied under oath to the jury.  
Accordingly, the recommended sentence of 10 months’ incarceration is 
sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes set forth 
in § 3553(a)(2). 
  
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
    
MARKENZY LAPOINTE 
  
 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
 
BY:    Trevor C. Jones 
TREVOR C. JONES 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Fla. Bar No. 0092793 
500 E. Broward Blvd., 7th Floor 
 
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 
Tel: (786) 564-9109 
Trevor.Jones@usdoj.gov 
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 116   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/21/2024   Page 5 of 5

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.654235.116.0.pdf

Size

111,108 bytes

SHA-256

9519020bd041c780227d84f419485435d7bdfabc84feec9b731567454daee3bf

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.654235.116.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)