You are here

Justice News

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

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, September 26, 2016

Maryland Man Pleads Guilty To Theft Of Union Funds

HARRISBURG – The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that John Kauffman, Jr., age 36, Maugansville, Maryland pleaded guilty today before United States District Court Judge Sylvia H. Rambo in Harrisburg to stealing $22,062 from a union local at the Letterkenny Army Depot in Chambersburg, PA.

According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, Kauffman was charged with mail fraud on September 7, 2016.  The Information, which was filed pursuant to a plea agreement with the government, alleged that Kauffman stole $22,062 between September 2013 and July 2014 from the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE) Local Lodge 1442.   

Local 1442 is a small union, with approximately 47 members who work at the Letterkenny Army Depot.  Kauffman was President of Local 1442 from September 2013 and January 2015. Kauffman embezzled the $22,062 by writing 24 checks drawn against a union bank account that were payable to himself and by disguising the checks as payments for legitimate Local 1442 expenses. The fraud was discovered in January 2015 following an audit of the union’s finances.

The mail fraud count carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment and $250,000 fine. No date has yet been set for sentencing pending preparation of a pre-sentence report

The case was investigated by the U.S. Department of Labor’s, Office of Labor Management in Philadelphia and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Attorney Kim Douglas Daniel.

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.

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.

 

# # #

Topic(s): 
Financial Fraud
Updated September 26, 2016