Tobyhanna Resident Pleads Guilty To Heroin Trafficking
SCRANTON-The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that a 26-year-old Tobyhanna resident pleaded guilty today before U.S. District Court Judge Malachy E. Mannion in Scranton, to distribution and possession with intent to distribute heroin.
According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, the defendant, Jabril Greggs, also known as “Bril,” admitted to distributing more than 80 grams of heroin between late 2013 and early 2015. Greggs admitted to selling 100 bags of heroin to a confidential informant on July 10, 2014, in Monroe County. Eighty grams of heroin is equivalent to approximately 2,600 retail bags of heroin.
Greggs was indicted by a federal grand jury in October 2014, as a result of an investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Pennsylvania State Police, the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office, and Pocono Mountain Regional Police.
Greggs faces up to 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine. Judge Mannion ordered a pre-sentence report to be completed. Sentencing will be scheduled after the pre-sentence report is completed.
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.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Francis P. Sempa is prosecuting 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 is 20 years’ 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.
# # #