Scranton Woman Indicted On Cocaine And Heroin Trafficking Charges
SCRANTON- The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that Patricia Cook, age 59, of Scranton, Pennsylvania, was indicted by a federal grand jury on drug trafficking and attempted witness tampering charges.
The indictment was unsealed following Cook’s arraignment on January 17, 2017, before U.S. District Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick. Cook was placed on supervised release pending trial.
According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, the indictment alleges that Cook distributed and conspired to distribute heroin and cocaine between January 2015 and April 2015, in Scranton. The indictment also alleges that she attempted to tamper with a witness in a grand jury investigation.
The investigation was conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant United States Attorney Jenny P. Roberts is prosecuting the case.
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.
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 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 each offense is 20 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.
# # #