Month: February 2023

Source: United States Department of Justice News

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA – DERECK CELESTIN, JR., age 37, a resident of Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, was sentenced on February 16, 2023 to 120 months imprisonment, 5 years of supervised release, and a mandatory $200 special assessment fee by U.S. District Judge Susie Morgan, after pleading guilty to a two-count indictment which charged him with distribution of methamphetamine in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B), and 841(b)(1)(A), announced U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans.

According to court documents, a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)  investigation revealed that CELESTIN was a methamphetamine distributor in Terrebonne Parish. DEA agents arranged two controlled purchases of methamphetamine from CELESTIN. On July 13, 2021, agents arranged the purchase of 48.73 grams of methamphetamine from CELESTIN. On August 9, 2021, agents arranged the purchase of 130.35 grams of methamphetamine from CELESTIN.

This case was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration and Terrebonne Parish Sheriff’s Office. The prosecution was handled by Assistant United States Attorney J. Benjamin Myers of the Narcotics Unit.

Source: United States Department of Justice News

Defendant Engaged in Multiple Physical Confrontations with Police

            WASHINGTON – A Texas man was sentenced today to prison for assaulting a law enforcement officer during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His actions and the actions of others disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the 2020 presidential election.

            Garret Miller, 36, of Richardson, Texas, was sentenced in the District of Columbia to 38 months in prison on charges of assaulting a police officer, interstate threat to injure or kidnap, three counts of interfering with law enforcement during a civil disorder, entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, impeding ingress and egress in a restricted building or grounds, engaging in disorderly conduct in a capitol building, impeding passage through the Capitol grounds or buildings, and demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building. Miller pleaded guilty to those charges in December of 2022.

            In addition to the prison term, U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols ordered 36 months of supervised release.

            According to court documents, on Jan. 6, 2021, Miller traveled to Washington, D.C. to stop Congress’ certification of the 2020 presidential election. He brought with him rope, a grappling hook, a mouth guard, and a bump cap – tools that he referred to as “riot gear” – and stated that he “looked forward” to fighting what he called the “soft” people that he might encounter in Washington, D.C. Miller was obsessed with the results of the 2020 presidential election and his belief that it had been stolen. Using social media, he had posted threats to multiple people, including Senator Charles Schumer, Mark Zuckerburg, and Jack Dorsey.

            During the breach of the U.S. Capitol Building, Miller was at the forefront of every barrier overturned, police line overrun, and entryway breached within his proximity that day. He was so disruptive on the East Front of the building that he was twice detained, the second time resulting in him being put in handcuffs. After being released and vowing to leave, Miller instead stayed at the riot, initially recording himself talking about a revolution.

            Miller then forced his way past the United States Capitol Police (“USCP”) and entered the Rotunda, making it to the old Senate Chamber before being turned back to the Rotunda. As the line of USCP and Metropolitan Police Officers (“MPD”) attempted to remove the rioters, Miller stayed on the front lines, assaulted an MPD Sergeant, and engaged in a physical altercation with no fewer than six officers. Following his ejection from the building, Miller then made his way to the West Front, where he watched the violent encounter at the Lower West Terrace tunnel until finally leaving the Capitol grounds after 5:00 p.m.

            At 7:26 p.m., in response to Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez’s social media post to “Impeach,” Miller directly responded: “Assassinate AOC.” Following the riot and up until his arrest, Miller continued to discuss his desire to “start assassinating,” bragged to his friends about how he “terrified [c]ongress,” and openly discussed his desire to publicly identify the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt and “hug his neck with a nice rope.” Miller was so proud of his conduct, that when he was arrested on January 20, 2021, he was found wearing a shirt with an image of the former president and the words “I was there, Washington, D.C., January 6, 2021.”

            The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas.

            The case was investigated by the FBI’s Dallas and Washington Field Offices. Valuable assistance was provided by the Metropolitan Police Department U.S. Capitol Police.

            In the 25 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 985 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including approximately 319 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing. 

            Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.

Source: United States Department of Justice News

The Department of Justice, together with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), announced today that the government has resolved allegations that GoodRx Holdings Inc., doing business as GoodRx Gold, GoodRx Care, and Hey Doctor (GoodRx), violated the FTC Act and the FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule. Pursuant to a settlement by the parties, a consent order was entered last Friday by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The government’s complaint, filed on Feb. 1, alleges that by disclosing millions of users’ personal health information to third parties without the users’ authorization, consent, or knowledge, GoodRx violated the FTC Act’s prohibition on unfair and deceptive trade practices and the FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule. The users’ information that was disclosed included personally identifying information, as well as details about medications and sensitive health conditions. GoodRx shared this personal health information despite its repeated assurances that the company would protect users’ privacy. For example, GoodRx’s public policies stated that the company would not provide to third parties any information that revealed a personal health condition or personal health information. The company’s advertising also featured a seal stating that it was “HIPAA Secure: Patient Data Protected,” even though it is not a covered entity under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and it never complied with HIPAA requirements. Moreover, GoodRx did not comply with the Health Breach Notification Rule’s requirement to notify users that it had disclosed their health information to third parties without their consent.

The stipulated order entered by the Court on Feb. 17 requires GoodRx to pay a civil penalty of $1.5 million and to take corrective action to prevent future unauthorized disclosure of users’ sensitive health information and to ensure compliance with the FTC Act and rules. The order requires that GoodRx notify users that their information was disclosed, bans the company from disclosing health information for advertising purposes, prohibits further misrepresentations and the disclosure of health information without affirmative consent and notice, and requires that users be notified in the event of a future breach. The order also imposes ongoing recordkeeping, certification, monitoring, and compliance obligations. 

“Consumers have a right to know whether and how their personal health information will be used, and to know when it has been disclosed to third-parties,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department is committed to enforcing protections against deceptive practices and unauthorized disclosure of personal health information.” 

“Companies that misuse their customers’ sensitive health information by sharing that information without their customers’ permission or knowledge will be held accountable,” said U.S. Attorney Stephanie M. Hinds for the Northern District of California. “We will continue to work with our partners at the FTC to protect against the unauthorized disclosure of such sensitive, private information.”

This matter is being handled by Sarah Williams of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sharanya Mohan for the Northern District of California, and Ronnie Solomon and Denise Oki of the FTC.

For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca. For more information about the FTC, visit its website at https://www.FTC.gov.

The statements made in the complaint are allegations that, if the case had proceeded to trial, the government would have been required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence.

Source: United States Department of Justice News

CHARLESTON, W.Va. – Michael Graves, 67, of Charlton Heights, and West Virginia Environmental Services (WVES), a company wholly owned by Graves, each pleaded guilty today to a felony violation of the Clean Water Act.

According to court documents and statements made in court, Graves and WVES owned and managed an industrial waste landfill in Fayette County, West Virginia. As noted by inspectors from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Graves and WVES failed to maintain the landfill’s leachate collection for several years beginning in at least 2016. Leachate is any liquid that passes through the landfill and picks up material from the landfill, including toxic materials that must be properly treated prior to discharge into a stream or tributary.

The failure of Graves and WVES to maintain the leachate collection system caused the discharge of leachate that contained toxic water pollutants into a tributary that flowed into the Kanawha River near Alloy, West Virginia. The toxic pollutants included arsenic, hexavalent chromium, and selenium. The Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the landfill has since lapsed and has not been renewed.

Graves is scheduled to be sentenced on June 1, 2023, and faces a maximum penalty of three years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a $250,000 fine. WVES faces a maximum penalty of $500,000 and five years of probation. Graves and WVES both face a possible order of restitution.

“Polluters must be held accountable when their violations result in a risk to our communities,” said United States Attorney Will Thompson. “I thank the Criminal Investigative Division of the Environmental Protection Agency and the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection for their investigative work in this case.”

“Our nation’s environmental laws are designed to ensure water contaminated with heavy metals and known carcinogens from industrial activities, such as those seen here, do not get into our rivers and streams,”  said Acting Special Agent in Charge Richard Conrad of EPA’s Criminal Investigation Program in West Virginia. “Today’s guilty plea by Mr. Graves and West Virginia Environmental Services demonstrates that individuals and companies who knowingly violate those laws will be held responsible for their crimes.”

Senior United States District Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. presided over the hearing. Assistant United States Attorney Erik S. Goes and Special Assistant United States Attorney Perry McDaniel are prosecuting the case.

On May 5, 2022, the Department launched the Office of Environmental Justice and announced a comprehensive environmental justice enforcement strategy. Enforcement of this strategy relies upon meaningful engagement and transparency with impacted communities regarding environmental justice issues, efforts, and results.

The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia enforces federal laws to protect environmental quality and human health in all communities within the district. In coordination with components of the Justice Department, the United States Attorney’s Office will hold polluters accountable for their actions, prioritizing cases that will reduce public health and environmental harms to overburdened and underserved communities.

The United States Attorney’s Office encourages the public to report suspected environmental violations within the district. Reports may be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency or by email, mail, or phone to the United States Attorney’s Office.

A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. Related court documents and information can be found on PACER by searching for Case No. 2:22-cr-186.

 

###

 

 

Source: United States Department of Justice News

Baltimore, Maryland – Erek L. Barron, United States Attorney for the District of Maryland announced today that the Maryland U.S. Attorney’s Office has implemented the new United States Attorney’s Offices’ Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy, released earlier today.  The policy, which is effective immediately, details the circumstances under which a company will be considered to have made a voluntary self-disclosure (VSD) of misconduct to a United States Attorney’s Office (USAO), and provides transparency and predictability to companies and the defense bar concerning the concrete benefits and potential outcomes in cases where companies voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, fully cooperate and timely and appropriately remediate.

 The goal of the policy is to standardize how VSDs are defined and credited by USAOs nationwide, and to incentivize companies to maintain effective compliance programs capable of identifying misconduct, to expeditiously and voluntarily disclose and remediate misconduct, and to cooperate fully with the government in corporate criminal investigations.  The policy was developed pursuant to the Deputy Attorney General’s September 15, 2022 memorandum, “Further Revisions to Corporate Criminal Enforcement Policies Following Discussions with Corporate Crime Advisory Group” (Monaco Memo), which directed each Department of Justice (DOJ) component that prosecutes corporate crime to review its policies on corporate voluntary self-disclosure and, if there was no formal written policy to incentivize self-disclosure, draft and publicly share such a policy.

Under the new VSD policy, a company is considered to have made a VSD if it becomes aware of misconduct by employees or agents before that misconduct is publicly reported or otherwise known to the DOJ, and discloses all relevant facts known to the company about the misconduct to a USAO in a timely fashion prior to an imminent threat of disclosure or government investigation.  A company that voluntarily self-discloses as defined in the policy and fully meets the other requirements of the policy, by—in the absence of any aggravating factor—fully cooperating and timely and appropriately remediating the criminal conduct (including agreeing to pay all disgorgement, forfeiture, and restitution resulting from the misconduct), will receive significant benefits, including that the USAO will not seek a guilty plea; may choose not to impose any criminal penalty, and in any event will not impose a criminal penalty that is greater than 50% below the low end of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG) fine range; and will not seek the imposition of an independent compliance monitor if the company demonstrates that it has implemented and tested an effective compliance program.

The policy identifies three aggravating factors that may warrant a USAO seeking a guilty plea even if the other requirements of the VSD policy are met: (1) if the misconduct poses a grave threat to national security, public health, or the environment; (2) if the misconduct is deeply pervasive throughout the company; or (3) if the misconduct involved current executive management of the company.  The presence of an aggravating factor does not necessarily mean that a guilty plea will be required; instead, the USAO will assess the relevant facts and circumstances to determine the appropriate resolution.  If a guilty plea is ultimately required, the company will still receive the other benefits under the VSD policy, including that the USAO will recommend a criminal penalty of at least a 50% and up to a 75% reduction off the low end of the USSG fine range, and that the USAO will not require the appointment of a monitor if the company has implemented and tested an effective compliance program.

 In cases where a company is being jointly prosecuted by a USAO and another DOJ component, or where the misconduct reported by the company falls within the scope of conduct covered by VSD policies administered by other DOJ components, the USAO will coordinate with, or, if necessary, obtain approval from, the DOJ component responsible for the VSD policy specific to the reported misconduct when considering a potential resolution.  Consistent with relevant provisions of the Justice Manual and as allowable under alternate VSD policies, the USAO may choose to apply any provision of an alternate VSD policy in addition to, or in place of, any provision of its policy.

The Attorney General’s Advisory Committee (AGAC), under the leadership of United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Damian Williams, requested that the White Collar Fraud Subcommittee of the AGAC, under the leadership of United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Breon Peace, develop policies in response to the Deputy AG’s memo.  The policy announced today was prepared by a Corporate Criminal Enforcement Policy Working Group comprised of U.S. Attorneys from geographically diverse districts, including U.S. Attorney Peace, as well as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Jessica Aber, U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut Vanessa Avery, U.S. Attorney for the District of Hawaii Clare Connors, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina Michael F. Easley, Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California Stephanie Hinds, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia Christopher Kavanaugh, and U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Philip Sellinger.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Riedel, White Collar Crimes Coordinator for the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, also participated in the development of the policy.

For more information on the Maryland U.S. Attorney’s Office, its priorities, and resources available to help the community, please visit https://www.justice.gov/usao-md.

# # #