Former Chambersburg Area School Teacher Indicted For Receipt And Possession Of Child Pornography
The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that Jeffrey Schmutzler, of Fayettesville, Pennsylvania, was indicted Wednesday by a federal grand jury in Harrisburg for receipt and possession of child pornography.
According to United States Attorney Peter J. Smith, Schmutzler, a former teacher at Chambersburg Area School District, was arrested on March 21, following charges filed in a Criminal Complaint. He remains in custody.
At this point in the investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has no evidence that any female students were involved or that there was any unlawful physical contact with any students.
Anyone with information related to this matter should please contact United States Postal Inspector Michael Corricelli at 717-257-5581.
If you feel you are a victim and need assistance please contact the Victim/Witness Coordinator for the Middle District of Pennsylvania Laurie A. Riley at 717-221-4482 or 1-866-673-7340.
The case is being investigated by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s(ICE) Homeland Security Investigations(HSI) and the Pennsylvania State Police. The prosecutor assigned to the case is Assistant United States Attorney Daryl F. Bloom.
Indictments and Criminal Informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.
A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
In this particular case, the mandatory minimum penalty is five years’ imprisonment. The maximum penalty under the federal statute is 30 years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.