Two Aliens Indicted For Illegal Reentry Charges
The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that Juan Valencia-Diaz, age 41, a citizen of Mexico, and Jaime Geovany Bustos-Heras, age 36, Ecuador, were indicted yesterday by a federal grand jury in Harrisburg on illegal re-entry charges.
According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, Valencia-Diaz was allegedly deported from the United States on September 5, 2008 and again on October 7, 2008 after he was convicted of driving under the influence. He allegedly re-entered the United States illegally sometime prior to September 2, 2014, when he was arrested by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at York County Prison, where he is incarcerated following his third conviction for driving under the influence.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Meredith A. Taylor.
Bustos-Heras was allegedly deported from the United States on November 1, 2007 after he was convicted of simple assault. He allegedly re-entered the United States illegally sometime prior to March 2, 2015, when he was arrested by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at his Harrisburg residence.
Bustos-Heras is currently incarcerated at the York County Prison. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Kim Douglas Daniel.
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 guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is 10 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.
# # #