You are here

Justice News

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Middle District of Pennsylvania

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Wilkes-Barre Men Charged With Drug Trafficking Offenses

     The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today the filing of criminal informations yesterday charging three men from Luzerne County separately with drug trafficking offenses. 

     Richard Hall, age 38, of Wilkes-Barre, was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine hydrochloride and cocaine base (crack) between 2009 and April 2013.  Hall is also charged with distributing marijuana to a seventeen year old.

     Alfred Oglesby, age 45, of Wilkes-Barre, was charged with distributing cocaine on numerous occasions between 2010 and April 2, 2013.

     Robert Tolbert, age 39, of Wilkes-Barre, was charged with possession with the intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride and cocaine base (crack) on April 2, 2013.

     United States Attorney Peter J. Smith stated that the charges are the result of an investigation conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office; and the Luzerne County District Attorney’s Office.  Prosecution is assigned to Assistant United States Attorney John Gurganus.

     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 maximum penalty under the federal statute is thirty years’ imprisonment for Richard Hall, and twenty years’ imprisonment for Alfred Oglesby and Robert Tolbert.  Each also faces 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.

Updated April 9, 2015