HARRISBURG-The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that Anthony Rowe, age 55, of Wilmington, Delaware, was convicted by a federal jury of distributing over 1,000 grams (one kilo) of heroin in Dauphin and Lycoming counties. The three-day trial was held before United States District Court Judge Sylvia H. Rambo in Harrisburg.
According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, the jury returned with the guilty verdict after approximately thirty minutes of deliberation. The evidence showed that Rowe travelled from Philadelphia to Dauphin and Lycoming Counties between February and June 2016, and distributed over a kilo of heroin. One kilo of heroin is approximately equal to 40,000 retail bags of heroin.
Rowe was immediately detained following the verdict. He faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment and up to life imprisonment.
This case was brought as part of a district wide initiative to combat the nationwide epidemic regarding the use and distribution of heroin. Led by the United States Attorney’s Office, the Heroin Initiative targets heroin traffickers operating in the Middle District of Pennsylvania and is part of a coordinated effort among federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who commit heroin related offenses.
This case was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Pennsylvania State Police and the Dauphin County Drug Task Force. Assistant United States Attorneys Daryl F. Bloom and Chelsea Schinnour prosecuted the case.
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 for this offense is life imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a $10,000,000 fine. The offense carries a mandatory term of imprisonment of ten years. 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.
# # #