The opinion of the court was delivered by: George H. Wu, U. S. District Judge
JUDGMENT AND PROBATION/COMMITMENT ORDER
In the presence of the attorney for the government, the defendant appeared in person on this date. 3 5 09
U WITH COUNSEL Eliot F. Krieger, Retained
U GUILTY, and the court being satisfied that there is a factual basis for the plea.
NOLO CONTENDERE NOT GUILTY
There being a finding/verdict of U GUILTY, defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense(s) of:
18 USC § 1505: OBSTRUCTION OF INVESTIGATION as charged in the First Superseding Indictment.
The Court asked whether defendant had anything to say why judgment should not be pronounced. Because no sufficient cause to the contrary was shown, or appeared to the Court, the Court adjudged the defendant guilty as charged and convicted and ordered that: Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant is hereby placed on probation for a term of: Two (2) Years.
It is ordered that the defendant shall pay to the United States a special assessment of $100, which is due immediately.
It is ordered that the defendant shall pay to the United States a total fine of $30,000, which shall bear interest as provided by law. The fine shall be paid over period of probation.
The defendant shall comply with General Order No. 01-05.
Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Craig Armenta, is hereby placed on probation on Count 20 of the First Superseding Indictment for a term of 2 years under the following terms and conditions:
1. The defendant shall comply with the rules and regulations of the U. S. Probation Office and General Order 318;
2. During the period of community supervision the defendant shall pay the special assessment and fine in accordance with this judgment's orders pertaining to such payment;
3. The defendant shall perform 200 hours of community service, as directed by the Probation Officer;
4. The defendant shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample from the defendant; and
5. The defendant shall apply monies received from income tax refunds greater than $500, lottery winnings, inheritance, judgments and any anticipated or unexpected financial gains to the outstanding court-ordered financial obligation.
The drug testing condition mandated by statute is suspended based on the Court's determination that the defendant poses a ...