EFTA Document EFTA01736057

Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 10-80015-CR-MARRA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, GOVERNMENT, ) ) -v- ) ) ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ, ) ) DEFENDANT. ) West Palm Beach, Florida ) June 18, 2010 ) TRANSCRIPT OF SENTENCING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Appearances: FOR THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT Reporter (561)514-3768 Ann Marie C. Villafana, AUSA 500 East Broward Boulevard, 7th Floor, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394 Dave Lee Brannon, AFPD 450 Australian Avenue, Suite 500, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Stephen W. Franklin, RMR, CRR, CPE Official Court Reporter 701 Clematis Street, Suite 417 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 E FTA_R 1_00020194 EFTA01736057 Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Call to the order of the Court.) THE COURT: Good morning, please be seated. We're here in the case of the United States of America versus Alfredo Rodriguez, Case Number 10-80015-CR-MARRA. May I have counsel state their appearances, please. MS. VILLAFANA: Good morning, Your Honor. Mario Villafana, for the United States. With me is special agent Christina Prior (phonetic), from the FBI. THE COURT: Good morning. MR. BRANNON: Good morning, Judge. Dave Lee Brannon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, on behalf of Alfredo Rodriguez, who's present in court. We also have some members of his family present in court that I'll mention later. THE COURT: All right. Good morning. We are here for sentencing. Have both sides reviewed the presentence investigation report? MS. VILLAFANA: Yes, Your Honor. MR. BRANNON: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Has the Defendant reviewed it with counsel? MR. BRANNON: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Okay. And all the objections were resolved; is that correct? MR. BRANNON: Yes, sir. EFTA_R1_00020195 EFTA01736058 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page THE COURT: So I will adopt the findings of the presentence report as the findings of the Court. Ms. Villafana, what's the Government's position regarding sentencing? MS. VILLAFANA: Your Honor, we would ask that the Court impose a sentence at the low end of the advisory guideline range. I think in accordance with the 3553(a) factors that is an appropriate sentence. In particular, the Court is required to consider the type of the offense, the facts and circumstances of the offense. In this case, the Defendant obstructed a very significant investigation into the exploitation of young women here in Palm Beach County, and he knew about the significance of the evidence that he had, and he made a decision that although he knew he was required to turn it over, he wanted to get money for that document rather than turn it over to law enforcement or to turn it over in response to civil subpoenas. The Court is required to consider how to promote respect for the law and how to deter others. Since you are involved in the civil litigation, I know that you are well aware of the facts of the case, and obstruction was a significant consideration in this case. There was great difficulty getting witnesses to assist and come forward in the case and respond to requests of law enforcement for evidence. In this case, we do believe that 24 months is an EFTA_R1_00020196 EFTA01736059 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 4 appropriate sentence. The Defendant, after entering his guilty plea in this case, went on to commit additional crimes which are the subject of a separate indictment and which will be the subject of a separate sentencing, but I do believe that the Court should consider them in determining what sentence is appropriate for this defendant. THE COURT: What is the status of the other case? MS. VILLAFANA: My understanding from talking to the AUSA down there is that the Defendant does intend to enter a guilty plea within the next couple weeks in that case. THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Brannon? MR. BRANNON: Thank you, Judge. First, I would note to the Court that I provided some submissions for sentencing yesterday, a number of family letters. THE COURT: I read them. MR. BRANNON: Thank you, sir. We have present in court today showing their love and support for Mr. Rodriguez his wife, Patricia Dunn, who has a letter she's going to read to the Court in just a minute, his daughter, Christina Rodriguez, who provided a letter already to the Court and will not be speaking, and his stepson, Christopher Dunn, who didn't provide a letter but will very briefly address the Court. EFTA_R1_00020197 EFTA01736060 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 5 With the Court's permission, I'll have them go ahead and come on up and speak to the Court, and then I'll go into my allocution. THE COURT: All right. Certainly. MR. BRANNON: Okay. Mr. Dunn, would you come forward. THE WITNESS: Good morning. THE COURT: Your name, please? THE WITNESS: Christopher Dunn. I just wanted to say a few words about my stepfather. I've actually been here before when I was studying law back in high school, but I never thought I'd be here in these circumstances. It's just -- it's -- I don't know how to say this. It's not in character for my stepfather. This was the man that, more than after maybe myself, was the biggest moral anchor in my life. He would always say things like, you need to do the right thing no matter what. There was no explanation, it was just to be done, and that things had to be done by the book. That, you know, you had to put other people first and worry about other people. And this isn't -- this isn't -- this scene isn't where he belongs. He's -- I don't know if you can call anybody perfect, but he -- I can call him a good man. And he may be desperate at times, even ignorant of things at times and not always right, but he's good at heart. EFTA_R1_00020198 EFTA01736061 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 6 You know, I don't know if this helps or hurts, but a few months ago, actually months ago, I was -- I actually -- I've been reading more. I've -- I pray for my family, and I pray for a lot of things, and I'm thankful for a lot, but I don't know if I should regret this, but I prayed a long time ago before, before any of this, that as good as Alfredo was, wanted to make him a better man, as good as one can be, and I actually prayed that something would come about to where he could see the light and become closer with God. And I knew what -- I mean, I'm not a fool. I know a lot of people don't change until they're traumatized, you know, for the better, and I knew what I was praying for was a trauma. I even thought it to myself. I didn't know. I guess mysterious ways indeed. I didn't know what I was praying for specifically, but I knew he needed something to jolt him to become even better than he already was. And as also this has been passing and all these things have been happening, the silver lining is really that I've seen him become more of a Bible man, you know. He listens to the Word more. He's been quoting me. He's been quoting to me the words, and I've seen a good man transform into an even better man. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. BRANNON: And Ms. Dunn, I believe you bade letter you want to read to the Judge? EFTA_R1_00020199 EFTA01736062 Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. THE COURT: Good morning. Your name, please? THE WITNESS: Good morning. THE COURT: Your name? THE WITNESS: Patricia Dunn. THE COURT: Patricia? THE WITNESS: Yes, Dunn, D-u-n-n. THE COURT: Can you spell your first name? THE WITNESS: Patricia, P-a-t-r-i-c-i-a. THE COURT: Thank you. THE WITNESS: Your Honor, it was difficult for me to write something on behalf of Alfredo Rodriguez because he's the least person that I could think would ever need your mercy. Alfredo has always been respectful, determined, honest, caring, helpful, a great father, a great husband and a great friend. I have shared my life with Alfredo for the past 17 years. After my first husband pass away, he helped me raise my two children as well as his three children. He gave all of them nothing but love, commitment and great example. Alfredo has been taught all his life to be good, to be a good citizen and excel at whatever he did. He proudly taught this to all our children. Alfredo has the honor to say that his grandfather was tae only Bolivian lawyer to be seated at the House of Lords in E FTA_R 1_00020200 EFTA01736063 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 8 England where he was serving as an ambassador to Bolivia. His grandfather was a great example for Alfredo and our siblings. Alfredo attended the Bolivian air force academy and later attended the United States Air Force. He has -- THE COURT: Ms. Dunn, can you slow down, pleasel Because the court reporter is having trouble. THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. THE COURT: That's all right. Just relax and speak a little more slowly. THE WITNESS: You want me to repeat the last sentence? THE COURT: Yes, please. THE WITNESS: Alfredo attended the Bolivian air force academy, and later he attended the United States Air Force. He has lived in this country for more than 30 years. And even though sometimes times were difficult, he always kept his straight path without breaking the law. What he's going through right now, it is out of character for him. He always told all of our children to do good, not to turn away from their goals, to go to schoc: to help others. He wanted to inject the good in our children's DNA. We as a family need Alfredo. He's our pillar. Please do not let the moment of weakness or need or mostly ignorance to ruin his life and most of our lives. Please, EFTA_R1_00020201 EFTA01736064 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 9 sir, give him the opportunity to be free and to be with us. We need him. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. BRANNON: Your Honor, this is not our normal case. I don't really feel I can comment too much about the Miami matter since that is pending, even though I understand -- my understanding of the resolution is the same as the Government's. Mr. Rodriguez had made a good living as a house man to the wealthy, and that's reflected in several paragraphs in the PSI. I think one of the things that a lot of people don't understand is that his having any connection at all to Mr. Epstein, once that particular story became well-known, entirely finished that line of work for him. Frankly, none of the wealthy wanted to be associated with anybody that had anything to do with what happened at Mr. Epstein's house. even though Alfredo did good work and a lot of people had thought a lot of him and he had worked for a lot of other people in the past, once that fact became known and once they could do a background check or a Google search on Mr. Rodriguez and see his name tied to Mr. Epstein, they were not interested. They didn't want to have him working with them. So he hit some real economic hard times. One thing I don't think any of us are real clear EFTA_R1_00020202 EFTA01736065 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 10 at -- and you know that the central point in this obstruction charge is the book that has been mentioned. I don't know at what point Mr. Rodriguez became aware that he actually had the book. One of the things that Mr. Rodriguez did was he live° at Mr. Epstein's estate. And when he left Mr. Epstein's employment, a lot of stuff got packed up and put away. One of those things was a copy of the book, of which there were many copies, and Mr. Rodriguez had one as Mr. Epstein's house man. There came a point at which he was aware that he had the book. I can imagine if I was packing up my office, I'm not sure how long I would know that I had everything that I had in the boxes until I started going through them and see them. He did cooperate in the early stages of the investigation. He's mentioned in news reports where he had given information and papers over to the Palm Beach Police Department when they investigated. He has been a good family man. That's been reflected in the letters. We are cooperating with the Government now and will continue to cooperate with the Government. I think one of the things that we do have to consider in deciding what is an appropriate sentence in this case is what happened to Mr. Epstein. It is difficult for me to justify Mr. Rodriguez getting a sentence greater than Mr. Epstein received, and Mr. Epstein received a sentence 0: E FTA_R 1_00020203 EFTA01736066 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 11 18 months in the stockade on some very serious charges. I can introduce a copy of the nonprosecution agreement into the record if the Court wishes me to. THE COURT: I'm familiar with it. MR. BRANNON: Okay. I don't want to necessarily put that in the record unless we need to have it in the record. So I would ask the Court to consider that as an appropriate sentence in this case. I know that's a sentence below the guideline range, but I think when we look at how society views results, I think there's just something that doesn't look quite right for Mr. Epstein's house man to get a greater sentence for what he's done than Mr. Epstein did for what he's done, which is substantially worse. So I would ask the Court to sentence Mr. Rodriguez to a sentence of 18 months. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Does Mr. Rodriguez wish to say anything? THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, I'm not going to make this long, but like my wife and my kids, I always told them to do the right thing, and I sent them to college to push to higher education. But I'm really sorry for what I did, and just pray that the Court to be merciful to me, sir THE COURT: Thank you. THE DEFENDANT: Thank you, sir. THE COURT: Ms. Villafana, what do you have le. say EFTA_R1_00020204 EFTA01736067 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 12 about the somewhat logical argument that maybe Mr. Rodriguez shouldn't get worse than Mr. Epstein did in his plea agreement with the State? MS. VILLAFANA: I certainly understand the logic. know that if he had gotten the two-level reduction for acceptance, he would have been at that same sentence of 18 months at the low end. He didn't get the two-level reduction for acceptance because the day of his change of plea, he went and drove down to Miami and conducted a purchase of various firearms with an undercover officer, which is why the twc levels were added. So that's certainly a difference. Another difference is that while I can't -- I obviously don't have a crystal ball, and I can't say what would have happened if this evidence had come to light during the pendency of the grand jury investigation, what I can say is that there were significant issues related to federal prosecution of the Epstein case in terms of the interstate nexus between the crimes that were under investigation. Some of the information contained in the book that Mr. Rodriguez had, as well as other information that he was able to provide once he was cooperating post-arrest, would have answered the questions that were raised regarding that interstate nexus. So would that have meant that there definitely would have been a federal prosecution? I can't say for certain. Would that significantly have advanced the ball? Yes. E FTA_R 1_00020205 EFTA01736068 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 13 THE COURT: Mr. Brannon mentioned that there were other copies of this book. I thought he said there were many copies of this book. Is that true as far as you're concerned? And how and when did these other copies come to light? MS. VILLAFANA: No other copies have come to the light of any federal investigator, but our understanding from interviewing Mr. Rodriguez was that multiple copies of that book were made and were kept at Mr. Epstein's homes throughout the world, but none of them were ever either found during the search of Mr. Epstein's home in Palm Beach, and obviously no other search warrants were ever executed on his islands or any of his other residences. So this is the only copy that's known to law enforcement. THE COURT: Oh, but he contends that there were other copies? MS. VILLAFANA: Yes. And I think from seeing the book, I think that that's true. THE COURT: Okay. So he lost his two points for acceptance because of the gun charge? MS. VILLAFANA: Yes. MR. BRANNON: Actually, Judge, I think it was three points for acceptance, because we're at an offense level 17. It would be 16 or greater. He would have gotten a three-level reduction for acceptance. His guidelines with acceptance would have been 15 to 21 months. EFTA_R1_00020206 EFTA01736069 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 14 MS. VILLAFANA: Okay. Right. So -- but he's at a 17 now, which is 24 to 30, and he would have been at a 14, which would have been, right, 15 to 21. THE COURT: All right. So he would have gotten 15? You would have been recommending 15 if he hadn't been involved in the gun charge? MS. VILLAFANA: That's correct. THE COURT: And he's obviously going to get punished for the gun charge separate and apart from what happens here if he pleads guilty and is convicted one way or the other. MS. VILLAFANA: Correct. THE COURT: All right. Anything else? MR. BRANNON: No, sir. THE COURT: All right. The Court has considered the statements of all the parties, the presentence report, which contains the advisory guidelines, as well as the statutory factors set forth in 18 U.S.C., Section 3553(a)(1) through (7). It is the finding of the Court the Defendant is no. able to pay a fine. Now, in imposing sentence, the Court has to considc the statutory factors of 3553, which require the Court to consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, which this case are significant because of the impact it had on the investigation of Mr. Epstein. And much has been said and EFTA_R1_00020207 EFTA01736070 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 15 written about the sentence that Mr. Epstein received for the crimes to which he's pled guilty, and if this book had been produced when requested things may have been different. So in one sense when we compare the sentence that's going to be imposed in this case to what Mr. Epstein got, if this book had been produced, Mr. Epstein's sentence might have been significantly different. But he got what he got, and I think that's a factor to be considered in this case. The history and characteristics of this defendant up until this incident and this gun incident, he's had an exemplary life. And I don't know what has brought about this change in his behavior, but two incidents so close together is somewhat troubling. The Court has to consider the need for the sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law and to provide just punishment. The Court has to consider the need to protect the public from further crimes of the Defendant, which I really don't think is too much of a concern. I don't think Mr. Rodriguez is going to be in any more trouble after he finishes his sentence for this case and whatever sentence, any, may be imposed for the gun case. Also, the Court has to consider the need to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct by others and has to consider the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities EFTA_R1_00020208 EFTA01736071 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 16 among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct. So if you look at this particular incident, his guidelines would be 15 to, what is it, 18 months, or 21? MR. BRANNON: Fifteen to 21, Judge. THE COURT: Fifteen to 21 months if he hadn't been involved in the gun charge. He's going to get, if he's going to plead guilty, which I'm told he probably will -- and whether he pleads guilty or not, from what I understand of the case, it's likely he's going to get convicted one way or the other anyway. So he's going to get punished for that gur charge separate and apart from what happens here, so I don't know that it makes sense to have to increase his punishment here because of a gun charge that he's going to get punished for independently. And there is some logic to the argument that Mr. Rodriguez here shouldn't be punished more severely than Mr. Epstein, who did significantly more egregious things than Mr. Rodriguez did. Although, as I said, if this information had come to light sooner, maybe Mr. Epstein situation would have turned out differently. But taking into consideration the fact that he is going to be punished for his gun charge separately, and that would have affected his guideline, and Mr. Epstein's sentence was less than his guidelines here, I think a sentence below E FTA_R 1_00020209 EFTA01736072 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 17 the advisory guideline range would be sufficient but not greater than necessary to comply with the factors under 3553. So I am going to impose a sentence below the advisory guideline range. Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the Defendant, Alfredo Rodriguez, is hereby committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of 18 months. Upon release from imprisonment, the Defendant shall be placed on supervised release for a term of two years. Within 72 hours of his release, the Defendant shall report in person to the probation office in the district where he's released. While on supervised release, the Defendant shall not commit any crimes, he shall be prohibited from possessing a firearm or other dangerous devices, and he shall not possess a controlled substance. He shall cooperate in the collection of DNA and shall comply with the standard conditions of supervised release that have been adopted by this court, as well as the following special conditions: Financial disclosure requirement and permissible search, as noted in Part G of the presentence report. The Defendant shall also immediately pay to the United States a special assessment of 5100. EFTA_R1_0002021 0 EFTA01736073 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 18 Total sentence is 18 months' imprisonment, two years' supervised release and a $100 special assessment. Now that sentence has been imposed, does the Defendant or his counsel object to the Court's findings of fact or the manner in which sentence was pronounced? MR. BRANNON: No, sir. We do have one request of the Court. THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRANNON: We would ask the Court to recommend the Miami area as the place of incarceration. THE COURT: I'll make that recommendation. Any objection from the Government? MS. VILLAFANA: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Rodriguez, you have the right to appeal the sentence that's been imposed. If you wish to file an appeal, you must file your notice of appeal within 14 days from the date judgment's entered in this case. And if you are unable to pay for the cost of the appeal, you may seek leave to file the appeal in forma pauperis. Good luck to you, sir. Thank you. (Proceedings concluded.) EFTA_R1_00020211 EFTA01736074 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 19 * * * * * CERTIFICATE I, Stephen W. Franklin, Registered Merit Reporter, and Certified Realtime Reporter, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. Dated this 22nd day of JUNE, 2010. /s/Stephen W. Franklin Stephen W. Franklin, RMR, CRR EFTA_R1_0002021 2 EFTA01736075