Skip to main content
Press Release

Dauphin County Man With Prior Conviction Indicted Federally For Unlawful Possession Of Firearm

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

HARRISBURG - The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that a Dauphin County man was indicted late yesterday by a federal grand jury in Harrisburg for possession of a pistol by a person prohibited by law from having a firearm.

According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, the grand jury alleges that Lawrence Bethea, age 31, was found to be in possession of a concealed .380 caliber pistol after being approached by police in Harrisburg.  Bethea was found asleep inside his vehicle, which was parked in the middle of the 1600 block of Berryhill Street.  When police located the firearm, Bethea ran and struggled with police after being apprehended. Bethea, as a person with a previous conviction for an offense punishable by a prison term in excess of one year, is prohibited by law from possessing a firearm.    

This case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Harrisburg Bureau of Police and the Pennsylvania State Police.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Daryl F. Bloom.

Indictments are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.  A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

The maximum penalty under federal law is 10 years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a $250,000 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 February 4, 2016