Wilkes-Barre Man Charged In Straw Purchase Of Firearm
SCRANTON - The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that a Wilkes-Barre man was charged with making false statements to a federally licensed firearm dealer.
According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, Ruben Rosario, age 19, of Wilkes-Barre, was charged in a Criminal Information, filed October 31, 2016, in United States District Court in Scranton, with providing false information to Piestrak’s Gun Shop, in Nanticoke, Pennsylvania, on April 5, 2016, in connection with the purchase of a firearm.
This matter was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Robert J. O’Hara.
Together with the Criminal Information, the government also filed a plea agreement with Rosario, which is subject to the approval of the court. No date has yet been scheduled for the entry of Rosario’s guilty plea.
This case was brought as part of the Violent Crime Reduction Partnership (“VCRP”), a district wide initiative to combat the spread of violent crime in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Led by the United States Attorney’s Office, the VCRP consists of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies whose mission is to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who commit violent crimes.
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 is ten 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.
# # #