The opinion of the court was delivered by: Andrew J. Guilford 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.
X WITH COUNSEL Cuauhtemoc Ortega, DFPD (Name of Counsel)
X 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 X GUILTY, defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense(s) of: Delivery for Introduction into Interstate Commerce of Misbranded Drug in violation of 21 U.S.C. §331(a) and 333(a)(1)), a misdemeanor, as charged in the Single Count Information
The Court asked whether there was any reason 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 committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of:
It is ordered that the defendant shall pay to the United States a special assessment of $25, which is due immediately. It is ordered that the defendant shall pay restitution in the total amount of $8,870.00 under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. The amount of restitution ordered shall be paid as follows: Victim: Food and Drug Administration; Amount: $8,870.00.
Nominal monthly payments of at least $100 shall be made during the period of supervised release. These payments shall begin 30 days after the commencement of supervision. Nominal restitution payments are ordered as the court finds that the defendant's economic circumstances do not allow for either immediate or future payment of the amount ordered.
The defendant shall comply with General Order No. 01-05. Under Guideline Section 5E1.2(a), all fines are waived as the Court finds that the defendant has established that he is unable to pay and is not likely to become able to pay any fine.
Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Phu Tan Luong, is hereby committed on the Single-Count Information to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of 1 months, to run concurrently to the sentence previously imposed in Docket No. SACR05-00066.
Upon release from imprisonment, the defendant shall be placed on supervised release for a term of three years, under the following terms and conditions:
The defendant shall comply with the rules and regulations of the U. S. Probation Office and General Order 05-02;
During the period of community supervision the defendant shall pay the special assessment in accordance with this judgment's orders pertaining to such payment;
The defendant shall comply with the immigration rules and regulations of the United States, and if deported from this country, either voluntarily or involuntarily, not re-enter the United States illegally. The defendant is not required to report to the Probation Office while residing outside of the United States; however, within 72 hours of release from any custody or any re-entry to the United States during the period of Court-ordered supervision, the defendant shall report for instructions to the United States Probation Office, located at: United States Court House, 411 West Fourth Street, Suite 4170, Santa Ana, California 92701-4516;
The defendant's employment as an owner, operator or employee of any company that sells or produces vitamins, dietary supplements, or health products shall be subject to continuous review and verification by the Probation Officer, and the defendant shall follow the rules and regulations of the Food and Drug Administration as well as any other state, local or federal regulators related to this employment; and
The defendant shall apply all monies received from income tax refunds, 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 ...