Government Sentencing Memorandum — United States v. Osvaldo Villegas Rivera (S.D. Fla., Dkt. 75)

Summary

The Government Sentencing Memorandum in United States v. Osvaldo Villegas Rivera, Case No. 1:22-CR-20039-ALTONAGA, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Document 75, entered October 27, 2022. The Government seeks a sentence of 121 months imprisonment, the low end of a guideline range of 121 to 151 months, based on a total adjusted offense level of 29 and criminal history category IV. It states that it is not seeking forfeiture or restitution, responds to the defendant's objections to the Presentence Investigation Report, and opposes any downward departure. The memorandum states that sentencing is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on October 28, 2022.

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 1:22-cr-20039-CMA Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2022 Page 1 of 5




                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                             Case No. 1:22-CR-20039-ALTONAGA

  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

  vs.

  OSVALDO VILLEGAS RIVERA,

              Defendant.
  __________________________________________/,


                      GOVERNMENT SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

         The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida and the Money

  Laundering and Asset Recovery Section of the United States Department of Justice Criminal

  Division (“together, the Government”) hereby submit this memorandum regarding the sentencing

  of defendant Osvaldo Villegas Rivera, currently scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on October 28, 2022. This

  filing also serves as the Government’s response to the defendant’s Objections to the Presentence

  Investigation Report (PSR) filed on August 25, 2022, as Docket Number 60.

         As further detailed below, the Government’s position on sentencing is best represented by

  the terms and conditions of the plea agreement, filed on July 5, 2022, as Docket Number 55. The

  parties agreed in paragraph 2 of said agreement “to jointly recommend to the Court… [a] total

  adjusted Sentencing Guidelines offense level [of] 29.” Dkt. 55 at 2. In accord with the criminal

  history category of IV calculated by the United States Probation Office in the Presentence

  Investigation Report (Dkt. 71 at para. 42), the Government avers that the applicable guideline

  range is 121 to 151 months. See Sentencing Table, pg. 407, Ch. 5 Pt. A, United States Sentencing

  Guidelines Manual, November 1, 2021. Based on those calculations, and in fulfillment of its

  agreement to “recommend the low-end of the advisory guideline range,” the Government seeks a
Case 1:22-cr-20039-CMA Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2022 Page 2 of 5




  sentence of 121 months imprisonment be imposed upon the defendant. Dkt 55 at 3. The

  Government is not seeking forfeiture or restitution.

  I. Background

         Prior to his arrest in Puerto Rico by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on

  February 22, 2022, the defendant had been indicted by a Federal grand jury for a single count of

  conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section

  1956(h); with controlled substance violations as the underlying specified unlawful activity. Dkt.

  3. The defendant plead guilty to the indictment on July 5, 2022. Dkt. 54.

         As part of his guilty plea, the defendant admitted, among other things, to conspiring with

  others to launder over $2.5 million from the New York-New Jersey area through Miami and on to

  Venezuela. Dkt. 56 at 1. The defendant further admitted that the laundered funds consisted of five

  shipments of bulk cash picked up by a network of couriers employed by the conspirators. Id. The

  defendant admitted that he knew all the cash was traceable to cocaine sales. Id. at 2.

         If this case were to have proceeded to trial, the Government would have proven the

  defendant’s crimes through direct testimony from eyewitnesses of the bulk cash transfers,

  including several totaling over $1 million that were seized by agents of the DEA. At trial the

  Government would also have used lengthy DEA recordings of incriminating statements made by

  the defendant prior to his arrest. On the recordings, the defendant makes detailed admissions about

  the conspiracy, such as acknowledging the seizures by DEA and by confirming that the origin of

  the laundered funds was drug sales.

         U.S. Probation Officer Kira Harmeling conducted a presentence investigation of the

  defendant and filed the final report and addendum on October 17, 2022. Dkt. 71. The Government




                                                   2
Case 1:22-cr-20039-CMA Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2022 Page 3 of 5




  filed no objections. The defendant had filed objections to the draft report on August 25, 2022.

  Dkt. 60.

         Regarding the defendant’s objections to the PSR, the Government submits that the Court

  should adopt the parties recommended adjusted offense level 29. However, the Court should deny

  the defendant’s objections as they related to his criminal history category IV. The United States

  adopts the position of the U.S. Probation Office’s determination that, pursuant to U.S.S.G. §

  4A1.2(a)(2), the defendant’s convictions listed in PSR paragraphs 39 and 40 are counted separately

  if there is no intervening arrest unless: “(A) the sentences resulted from offenses contained in the

  same charging instrument; or (B) the sentences were imposed on the same day.” See U.S.S.G. §

  4A1.2(a)(2). As neither A nor B apply, the Sentencing Guidelines instruct that these particular

  convictions are counted separately for purposes of determining the defendant’s criminal history.

  II.        3553 Factors

         The Government objects to any request by the defendant for any reduction in sentence

  below the applicable guideline range pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553 or any other basis. Nothing put

  forth in the defendant’s sentencing memorandum warrants serious consideration of a sentence

  reduction by the Court. There is no, “mitigating circumstance of a kind, or a degree, not adequately

  taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines that should

  result in a sentence different from that described” in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(4). 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b).

  The defendant’s conspiracy to launder cocaine proceeds out of the United States was deliberate

  and took place during a span of approximately two years. It required careful planning by the

  defendant and included the use of a network of couriers that had to be organized and directed.

         Furthermore, as noted on pages 12 to 18 of the Presentence Investigation Report, the

  defendant has already been convicted and served multiple, lengthy prison sentences for prior drug



                                                   3
Case 1:22-cr-20039-CMA Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2022 Page 4 of 5




  distribution and money laundering offenses. Dkt. 71. This illustrates that the defendant’s recent

  crimes were carried out despite full knowledge of the potential consequences currently being

  considered by the Court. The Court should therefore impose the Government’s guideline

  recommendation so that the final sentence reflects the seriousness of laundering drug proceeds,

  and will deter others from coming to the Southern District of Florida to conduct such criminal

  conduct. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(B).       Following the Government’s recommendation would

  promote respect for the United States’ drug and anti-money laundering laws, as well as provide a

  just punishment for a significant criminal offense. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A).

  III.   Government’s Position on Downward Departure

         In his Objections to the Presentence Investigation Report, the defendant cites U.S.S.G. §

  4A1.3(b)(1)’s downward departure provision for consideration by the Court. The Government

  objects and urges the court to reject a downward departure as inappropriate. U.S.S.G. §

  4A1.3(b)(1) is reserved only where, a “defendant's criminal history category substantially

  overrepresents the seriousness of the defendant's criminal history or the likelihood that the

  defendant will commit other crimes.” Here, the defendant’s criminal history is well placed in

  category IV as it includes major drug distribution and money laundering offenses. Dkt. 71 at 12-

  18. These crimes are serious and harmful to society. The defendant’s criminal history also reflects

  a record of convictions similar and relevant to the crime before the court today.

         The defendant did not receive criminal history points for his drug-related convictions listed

  in Paragraphs 37 and 38. If anything, the Guidelines highlight that an upward departure may be

  warranted concerning “[p]rior sentence(s) not used in computing the criminal history category.

  See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(a)(2)(A). As the Court can observe, the defendant’s criminal history is

  replete with drug trafficking and money laundering of drug proceeds.



                                                   4
Case 1:22-cr-20039-CMA Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2022 Page 5 of 5




         Accordingly, no downward departure of any kind should be granted by the Court.

  IV.    Conclusion

         For the foregoing reasons, the Government seeks a prison sentence of 121 months, which

  represents the lowest end of the applicable guideline range of 121 to 151 months.

                                              Respectfully submitted,

                                              JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ
                                              UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

                                       By:       /s/ Robert J. Emery
                                              Robert J. Emery
                                              Assistant United States Attorney
                                              Florida Bar No. 152579
                                              99 Northeast 4th Street
                                              Miami, Florida 33132-2111
                                              (305) 961-9421
                                       and
                                              BRENT S. WIBLE
                                              ACTING CHIEF, MONEY LAUNDERING AND
                                              ASSET RECOVERY SECTION

                                       By:        /s/ Joseph Palazzo
                                              Joseph Palazzo
                                              U.S. Department of Justice Trial Attorney
                                              SDFL Bar No. A5502141
                                              1400 New York Avenue, N.W. – 10th Floor
                                              Washington, D.C. 20005
                                              (202) 514-1263
                                              joseph.palazzo@usdoj.gov
  Dated: October 27, 2022




                                                  5


File and source

File

75.pdf

Size

197,112 bytes

SHA-256

b1b58d07202fdfae5215459fc714da754aed3e9f0c6f2916cfdbd9fee4da83ac

Our copy

75.pdf

Original

No public link identified.