Objections to Presentence Investigation Report by Andre Lorquet — USA v. Lorquet (Dkt. 54, S.D. Fla.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 1:22-cr-20326-KMM · Doc. 54 · 2023-03-13 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA  
 
CASE NO.: 22-cr-20326-KMM 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA            
                      Plaintiff, 
vs. 
 
ANDRE LORQUET, 
 
           Defendant. 
                                                                      / 
 
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT 
Defendant, ANDRE LORQUET, by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to Rule 
32(f) of the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure, Rule 88.9 of the Local Rules for the Southern 
District of Florida and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States 
Constitution, respectfully files the Defendant’s objections to the Pre-Sentence Investigation 
Report (PSI) and states: 
1. Paragraphs 6 and 40 
Mr. Lorquet objects to paragraphs 6 and 40 in that he did not violate the conditions of his 
bond. Mr. Lorquet applied for a passport card, and not a passport. He did so in order to get a 
second ID needed for him to open a bank account. Mr. Lorquet never intended to apply for a 
passport, nor was his intent to use the passport card for anything other than having a second ID. 
Even though Mr. Lorquet’s father resides in Haiti, Mr. Loquet has not had a relationship with his 
father since he was a child, nor can one use a passport card to travel to Haiti.  
The pretrial services address entered on the bond paperwork was immediately corrected 
by the undersigned. When Probation Officer Jimmy Navarro advised that the address was 
incorrect, the undersigned reach out to Magistrate Judge Becerra who pursuant to the parties’ 
Case 1:22-cr-20326-KMM   Document 54   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/13/2023   Page 1 of 3

 
2 
agreement corrected the bond paperwork without further intervention. On December 6, 2022, the 
Clerk filed a notice of filling bond paperwork with the correct address.  
2. Paragraphs 41 and 49 
Mr. Lorquet objects to the obstruction of justice upward adjustment based on §3C1.1 of 
the Sentencing Guidelines. §3C1.1 states that if (1) the defendant willfully obstructed or 
impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede, the administration of justice with respect to the 
investigation, prosecution, or sentencing of the instant offense of conviction, and (2) the 
obstructive conduct related to (A) the defendant’s offense of conviction and any relevant 
conduct; or (B) a closely related offense, increase the offense level by 2 levels. Section 3C1.1, 
Note 4 specifically lists some of the covered conduct where obstruction of justice applies. 
Applying for a passport card cannot be construed as committing a crime or as the PSI states, 
failing to withdraw from criminal conduct.  
Therefore, the upward adjustment pursuant for obstruction of justice pursuant to §3E1.1 
Is not warranted here.  
3. Paragraphs 43 and 52 
Mr. Lorquet objects to not receiving a three-level reduction for acceptance of  
responsibility pursuant to comment n.1(B) of §3E1.1. and because ‘it does not appear that he has 
voluntarily withdrawn from criminal co0nduct, therefore accepting criminal liability”. Mr. 
Lorquet’s application for a passport card can in no way be construed as criminal conduct. Even if 
one was to consider it to be a violation of the terms of his bond, it is not committing a crime.  
It is within the Court’s discretion whether or not to give a reduction for acceptance of 
responsibility when a defendant has committed another crime before sentencing. See United 
States v. Scroggins, 880 F.2d 1204 (11th Cir. 1989). Mr. Lorquet certainly did not commit a new 
Case 1:22-cr-20326-KMM   Document 54   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/13/2023   Page 2 of 3

 
3 
crime by applying for a passport card. As previously stated, Mr. Lorquet applied for a passport 
card, not a passport, for the sole purpose of having a second ID so that he could open a bank 
account. This application cannot be construed as someone committing a new crime. Therefore, 
Mr. Lorquet should receive acceptance of responsibility.  
4. Paragraphs 53 and 101 
If the Court sustains Defendant’s objections, the total offense level should be 22, a 
criminal history category I, and a guideline imprisonment range of 41-51 months. 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I HEREBY certify that on March 13, 2023, undersigned counsel electronically filed 
foregoing document with the Clerk of Courts using CM/ECF which will send notification of such 
filing to all counsel of record. 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
BOZANIC LAW, P.A. 
2847 Hollywood Blvd. 
Hollywood, FL 33020 
Telephone: 
954.920.9750 
Facsimile: 
954.400.0335 
E-Mail: Zeljka@bozaniclaw.com 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/Zeljka Bozanic 
By:_________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Zeljka Bozanic 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Florida Bar No.  23707 
 
Case 1:22-cr-20326-KMM   Document 54   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/13/2023   Page 3 of 3

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.616975.54.0.pdf

Size

115,026 bytes

SHA-256

4275ef537795252c727a321d7f32887eb1d3afa113ba008a5eac2d54be0585e8

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.616975.54.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)