Two Men Charged With Drug And Firearms Offenses

HARRISBURG – The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that Kyle Eugene Gordon, age 27, of Chambersburg, and Reginald L. Lomax, Jr., age 32, of York, were indicted separately by a federal grand jury yesterday in Harrisburg on drug and firearm offenses.

According to U.S. Attorney Peter Smith, Gordon is charged with being a felon unlawfully in possession of a firearm, possessing heroin with intent to distribute, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking, during April 2014 in Franklin County.

The investigation was conducted by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, with the assistance of the Franklin County Drug Taskforce.  Prosecution is assigned to Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Pfisterer.

Lomax, Jr. is charged with being a person unlawfully in possession of a firearm, possessing crack cocaine with intent to distribute, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking, during December 2014 in York County.

This matter was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, with the assistance of the York City Police Department.  Prosecution is assigned to Assistant U.S. Attorney James T. Clancy.

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 for Gordon and Lomax 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.

# # #