Skip to main content
Press Release

Convenience Store Robber Charged

For Immediate Release
U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Pennsylvania

     The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced the filing of a Criminal Information in U.S. District Court in Scranton on October 16, charging Daniel Ortiz, age 28, of Watertown, New York, with the four robberies of convenience stores in April and May 2011.

     According to United States Attorney Peter J. Smith, Ortiz allegedly robbed the Hilltop Sunoco / Extra Mart located at 238 State Route 6, Milford, Pennsylvania on April 6, 2011; the Turkey Hill Minit Market, 912 Pennsylvania Avenue, Matamoras, Pennsylvania, on April 11, 2011; the Hilltop Sunoco / Extra Mart located at 238 State Route 6, Milford, Pennsylvania on April 17, 2011; and the Turkey Hill Minit Market, 912 Pennsylvania Avenue, Matamoras, Pennsylvania, on May 5, 2011.  In doing so, Ortiz brandished weapons to instill fear to facilitate the robberies.

      The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Eastern Pike Regional Police Department, and the Pennsylvania State Police.  Prosecution is assigned to Assistant United States Attorney John Gurganus.

     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 80 years of 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.

Updated April 16, 2015