Supplement to Sentenicng Memorandum — United States v. Randy Frasinelli, Criminal No. 21-300 (Dkt. 111, W.D. Pa.)

Summary

The government's supplement to its sentencing memorandum in United States v. Randy Frasinelli, Criminal No. 21-300, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, filed March 22, 2023 as Document 111. Frasinelli pled guilty to defrauding the Paycheck Protection Program of more than $3.8 million, spent on items including luxury vehicles and a villa in Mexico. The government says it will prove at sentencing that thirteen of the fourteen character letters filed with the defense memorandum are forgeries, and argues that Frasinelli should lose the two-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, raising the total offense level from 26 to 28 and the guideline range from 63 to 78 months to 78 to 97 months. It asks for at least 97 months, opposes any continuance, and asks that Frasinelli be taken into custody at the end of the March 29, 2023 sentencing hearing.

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 2:21-cr-00300-WSH Document 111 Filed 03/22/23 Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Criminal No. 21-300

RANDY FRASINELLI

SUPPLEMENT TO SENTENICNG MEMORANDUM

AND NOW, comes the United States of America, by its attorneys, Troy Rivetti, Acting

United States Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, and Jeffrey R. Bengel, Assistant

United States Attorney for said district, and respectfully files this supplemental sentencing

memorandum.

The defendant, Randy Frasinelli, has pled guilty to defrauding the Paycheck Protection

Program of more than $3.8 million, which he used to pay for luxury vehicles, a villa in Mexico,

an East-African safari, precious metals, watches, works of art, and firearms, among other items.

On February 22, 2023, Frasinelli filed his sentencing memorandum, arguing that he should not

receive any additional jail time in connection with those offenses.

As support, he submitted fourteen character letters, marked as Composite Exhibit B. One

is drafted by a purported resident of Mexico, who has not been contacted by agents. The remaining

thirteen letters purport to have been drafted by people in politics, finance, business, technology,

and charitable organizations, and praise Frasinelli highly for his professional skill, generosity, and

sincerity. As the government will prove at sentencing, those letters are forgeries.

Frasinelli’s continued deceit, which has now targeted the Court, impacts his sentencing in

several ways. First, Frasinelli should lose all credit for the acceptance of responsibility. Under

the plea agreement, the United States had agreed to recommend a two-level reduction. See (Doc.

1
Case 2:21-cr-00300-WSH Document 111 Filed 03/22/23 Page 2 of 4

No. 84-1) ¶ B.3. Importantly, however, it also reserved the right to withdraw that recommendation

in the event that Frasinelli “act[ed] in a manner inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility.”

See id. The Sentencing Guidelines make clear that defendants who obstruct justice ordinarily

forfeit any reduction for the acceptance of responsibility. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 cmt. 4. And there

can be no doubt that Frasinelli’s conduct—which involved “providing materially false information

to a judge”—was obstructive. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. 4(F). “This sort of post-plea obstructive

conduct almost certainly disqualifies a defendant from receiving an acceptance-of-responsibility

adjustment.” United States v. Rickert, 685 F.3d 760, 768 (8th Cir. 2012) (no acceptance of

responsibility reduction for defendant who submitted forged letters with his sentencing

memorandum “in an attempt to influence the court’s sentencing decision”).

Second, after forfeiting Frasinelli’s reduction for acceptance of responsibility, the Court

should recalculate Frasinelli’s total offense level and guideline range. Instead of 26, Frasinelli’s

total offense level should be 28. Instead of 63 to 78 months, Frasinelli’s advisory guideline range

should be 78 to 97 months. That recalculation is permitted by the offense level stipulations in

Frasinelli’s plea letter, which produced a total offense level of 28 before affording Frasinelli a two-

level reduction for the acceptance of responsibility. See (Doc. No. 84-1) ¶¶ 7–10. But that

reduction only applied if it was “consistent with the [acceptance-of-responsibility] provisions of

paragraph B(3).” Id. ¶¶ 9, 10. Those are the provisions that Frasinelli has now breached, losing

his two-level reduction in the process.

Third, the Court should sentence Frasinelli to at least 97 months in prison, at the high end

of his new guideline range. Frasinelli has earned every point of the offense level that produced his

guideline range. Indeed, if not for the stipulations in his plea agreement, his recent obstruction of

justice would have pushed his offense level and guideline range even higher. A sentence at the

2
Case 2:21-cr-00300-WSH Document 111 Filed 03/22/23 Page 3 of 4

top of Frasinelli’s advisory guideline range is also consistent with the outrageous nature of his

conduct. Since the summer of 2020, Frasinelli has been unwaveringly deceptive—toward the

financial institutions that loaned him $3.8 million; toward the federal law enforcement agencies

that investigated his fraud; toward his first attorney, who negotiated with the government on his

behalf; and toward his third attorney, who is arguing his case at sentencing. Now, Frasinelli has

attempted to deceive this Court into giving him a more lenient sentence than his offenses deserve.

At every turn, Frasinelli’s conduct has betrayed a complete lack of respect for the law. Just as

Frasinelli felt entitled to $3.8 million of pandemic-relief money, he evidently feels entitled to

escape the consequences of his crimes. The Court must impose a sentence that holds him

accountable.

Fourth, the Court should deny any motions to continue Frasinelli’s sentencing. Since

February 2021, when agents of the FBI and IRS executed federal warrants at his home, Frasinelli

must have known that he had no defense to this case. Nonetheless, it has taken more than two

years, two criminal complaints, two arrests, an indictment, and three defense attorneys to arrive at

this point. It is time for Frasinelli to be sentenced. The government’s discovery of his continued

fraud should not be construed as good cause to defer the conclusion of this case. See Fed. R. Crim.

P. 45(b) (allowing for extensions of time based on a showing of “good cause”).

3
Case 2:21-cr-00300-WSH Document 111 Filed 03/22/23 Page 4 of 4

Finally, at the conclusion of his sentencing hearing on March 29, 2023, Frasinelli should

be taken directly into the custody of the United States Marshals. After attempting to deceive the

Court in connection with his sentencing, Frasinelli cannot credibly promise the Court to self-report

to the Bureau of Prisons.

Respectfully submitted,

TROY RIVETTI
Acting United States Attorney

By: /s/ Jeffrey R. Bengel
JEFFREY R. BENGEL
Assistant U.S. Attorney
DC ID No. 1016821

File and source

File: 111.pdf
Size: 149,406 bytes
SHA-256: 3c2ba4f03f569d19b223355c78fc6510fa502043cc3367eeede0a36b038e9224
Our copy: 111.pdf
Original: No public link identified.