Government's Objections to Presentence Investigation Report — United States v. Carlos Vazquez

Summary

The United States' objections to the Presentence Investigation Report (DE 49) in United States v. Carlos Vazquez, No. 1:21-cr-20231-DMM, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket November 1, 2021 as Document 50. The government argues that a quitclaim deed transferring the defendant's apartment, dated March 17, 2019, was in fact signed and recorded in 2021, in violation of a pretrial release bond condition barring sale or encumbrance of real property. It asks that Paragraph 4 of the report be amended to state the bond terms in full and that a statement in Paragraph 65 about a 2019 sale be stricken. The government also seeks a two-point enhancement for obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. The filing is signed by an Assistant United States Attorney.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2021 Page 1 of 4




                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                          CASE NO. 21-CR-20231-MIDDLEBROOKS

  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

  vs.

  CARLOS VAZQUEZ,

         Defendant.
                                       /

                  THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’s OBJECTIONS TO
                       PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT

         The United States of America files this Objection to the Presentence Investigation Report,

  DE 49 (“PSI”). Following the circulation of the PSI on October 18, 2021 which stated that

  Defendant Carlos Vazquez sold his residence at 5249 N.W. 7th Street, Apt. 408, Miami, FL (the

  “Apartment”) to Jose Estevez (“Estevez”) on March 17, 2019, investigation has revealed that

  Defendant Carlos Vazquez, procured and recorded a backdated quit claim deed (the “Deed”) for

  his Apartment in 2021 not 2019, purporting to gift the Apartment to Estevez. A copy of the Deed

  is attached as Exhibit 1. This transfer was in violation the terms Defendant’s pre-trial release

  bonds DE 12 &13, and dissipated assets which could otherwise be used to provide restitution to

  victims. Because of this false backdated Deed, the following changes should be made to the PSI:

         Paragraph 4

         This paragraph should be amended to fully state the terms of the pre-trail release bonds

  violated by Defendant. Currently, this paragraph summarizes, but does not fully state the material

  terms of the Defendant’s pre-trial release bonds, DE 12 & 13. Special Condition L of Defendant’s

  pre-trial release bonds, specify that “None of the signatories may sell, pledge, mortgage,

  hypothecate, encumber, etc., any real property they own until the bond is discharged, or otherwise

                                                  1
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2021 Page 2 of 4




  modified by the Court.” DE 12:2 & 13:2.

         Accordingly, Paragraph 4 of the PSI should be amended to read as follows:

         On March 31, 2021, the defendant was released on a $500,000 personal
         surety bond and a $50,000 ten percent bond, with a cosigner. The court
         ordered the following special conditions: surrender all passports and travel
         documents and do not obtain any during the pendency of this case; report to
         pretrial services as directed; submit to substance abuse testing and/or
         treatment; participate in mental health assessment and treatment; no contact
         with victims/witnesses except through counsel; refrain from possessing a
         firearm, destructive device, or dangerous weapon and must remove within
         24 hours; may not sell, pledge, mortgage, hypothecate, encumber, etc. any real
         property; may not return to apartment until firearm is seized by agents; and
         must reside with Annabel Lee at 15479 S.W. 35th Terrace, in Miami, Florida.
         On May 18, 2021, the Court modified the conditions of pretrial release
         ordering the defendant to reside at 5249 N.W. 7th Street, in Miami.

         Paragraph 65

         The statement in the PSI that “on March 17, 2019 he [Vazquez] sold the residence to Jose

  Estevez for $50,000” is false and should be stricken. On July 12, 2021, the same day as Vazquez’s

  first change of plea hearing, a backdated Quitclaim Deed (“Deed”) was recorded in the Miami-

  Dade Official records (CFN 2021R0493913, Book 32612 / Page 1489) purporting to transfer

  ownership of his Apartment to Oscar Jose Estevez. The Deed is purportedly dated and notarized

  March 17, 2019. See Exhibit 1.

         On October 28, 2021, Law enforcement spoke with Estevez, the grantee listed in the Deed.

  According to Estevez, he has known Defendant since he was 10 years old. Defendant has asked

  Estevez multiple times to let him transfer the Apartment to Estevez. Estevez has turned the

  Defendant down multiple times. One day Defendant explained the situation he was in with the

  IRS-CI and the US government and how he might be going to jail, and his fear of jail. Estevez

  agreed to let Defendant transfer the Apartment to him. Estevez was not present when the document

  was notarized, and he did not pay Defendant anything for the Apartment. Estevez confirmed that

                                                 2
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2021 Page 3 of 4




  it was Defendant’s idea to transfer the Apartment to Estevez and that the Deed was discussed and

  signed in 2021 not 2019.

          On October 28, 2021, Law enforcement spoke with Barbara Boada (“Boada”), who

  notarized the Deed, and her father Estevan Valderrama (“Valderama”), who signed the Deed as a

  witness. Valderama has known Defendant for a long time. Defendant told Valderama that he was

  selling the Apartment and needed a notary. Valderama asked Boada to notarize the Deed for a

  friend. Boada did not ask any questions about the Deed she was notarizing. Both Boada and

  Valderrama reported that they signed the documents 4 or 5 months ago in 2021. They did not sign

  the document in 2019.

          Further, the dates on the Deed are belied by Defendant’s own statements to probation and

  the Court. USPO Charisse Garcia confirmed Defendant’s ownership of the apartment during a

  May 26, 2021 home assessment. The March 29, 2021 Pre-Trial Service Report lists the Apartment

  as an unencumbered asset of Defendant worth $100,000 and explains that Defendant inherited the

  Apartment from his mother when she died in 2015.

          The Transfer is a Separate Basis for Obstruction of Justice

          Defendant’s recording of the backdated document in the official records of Miami-Dade

  County caused the probation office to rely upon such falsehoods and present them to the Court in PSI.

  Such conduct is a separate basis for a two-point enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for obstruction.

  Indeed, Comment note 4 (C) explains that one of the non-exhaustive factors justifying an enhancement

  is “producing or attempting to produce a false, altered, or counterfeit document or record during an

  official investigation or judicial proceeding.” S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. n.4(C). The false representations

  in the Deed, made their way into the PSI, and if believed would reduce the assets available for

  restitution.

          Alternatively, if Defendant had actually executed the deed and transferred the Apartment to

                                                   3
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2021 Page 4 of 4




  Oscar Jose Estevez in 2019, an obstruction of justice enhancement would be appropriate for providing

  false information to a probation investigation. “The preparation of a pretrial services report falls

  within the plain language of U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. n.4(H), which states that the enhancement

  applies when the offender “provid[es] materially false information to a probation officer in respect

  to a presentence or other investigation for the court.” United States v. Doe, 661 F.3d 550, 566

  (11th Cir. 2011). Representations about the Defendant’s ownership of real estate is material to the

  Magistrate’s bond determination.

         For the foregoing reasons, the above referenced changes should be incorporated into the

  PSI and Defendant deserves a two point enhancement for obstruction of justice pursuant to

  U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1.



                                                       Respectfully submitted,

                                                       JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ
                                                       UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

                                                 By:   /s/ Hayden P. O’Byrne
                                                       Hayden P. O’Byrne
                                                       Assistant United States Attorney
                                                       Florida Bar No. 60024
                                                       United States Attorney’s Office SDFL
                                                       99 Northeast 4th Street
                                                       Miami, FL. 33132-2111
                                                       Tel: (305) 961-9447
                                                       Hayden.obyrne@usdoj.gov




                                                   4


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.591071.50.0.pdf

Size

188,629 bytes

SHA-256

c516676d8fff4d1465ff5c0df3da6801e43113ca3a29af2fd2389b1033f9954a

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.591071.50.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)