Free Plea Agreement - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

A p case 1 :08-cr-00076-SLR Document 13 Flled 08/0 ,5 `/liilggkhgjé QOKMA,
Y? 1*//or A/Mr
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Plaintiff, )
v. ) Criminal Action No. 08-76-SLR
GUILLERMO A. MARTINEZ, )
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OF PLEA AGREEMENT
Pursuant to discussions between the United States of America, by and through its attorneys, Colm
F. Connolly, United States Attorney for the District of Delaware, and Christopher J. Burke, Assistant
United States Attorney for the District of Delaware, and the defendant, Guillermo A. Martinez, by and
through the defendant's attomey, Edson A. Bostic, Esquire, the following agreement is hereby entered
into by the respective parties:
1. The defendant shall plead guilty to Count Five of the Indictment, which charges him with
Possession of Child Pornography, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2252A(a)(5)(B)
and (b)(2). This crime carries a maximum penalty of ten years imprisomnent, a $250,000 iine, a life
term of supervised release (with a minimum mandatory term of tive years supervised release) and a
special assessment of $ 1 00. At sentencing, the United States will move to dismiss the remaining counts
of the Indictment against the defendant.
2. The defendant understands that if there were a trial, the government would have to prove the
following elements for Count Five beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) the defendant possessed child
pomography, deiined as a visual depiction of a minor engaged in an actual or simulated sex act and/or
the lascivious exhibition ofthe genitals or pubic area of a minor; (2) the defendant knowingly possessed

3 . _ Case 1:08-cr-00076-SLR Document 13 Filed 08/O4/2008 Page 2 of 3
the child pornography; and (3) the child pomography had been transported in interstate commerce, or
was produced using materials which had been transported in interstate commerce.
3. The defendant agrees to pay the $100 special assessment on the day of sentencing. If the
defendant is unable to pay this special assessment, or if the Court orders the payment of any fine as part
of the defendant’s sentence, the defendant agrees voluntarily to enter the Imnate Financial
Responsibility Program through which the Bureau of Prisons will collect a portion of the defendant’s
prison salary and apply it on the defendant’s behalf to the payment of the outstanding debt ordered.
4. Provided that the United States does not subsequently learn of conduct by the defendant
inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility, the United States agrees to recommend at sentencing a
two-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, pursuant to U.S.S .G. § 3E1 . 1 (a). If the defendant’ s
offense level is determined by the Court to be level 16 or greater, the United States will move for an
additional one point reduction, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b).
5. The defendant agrees to forfeit to the United States his interest in all computer hardware,
software, and storage media taken from the defendant’s home by officers of the Delaware State Police
on or about January 23, 2008.
6. The defendant understands that the District Court must consider the United States Sentencing
Guidelines and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in determining an appropriate sentence. At
this stage (prior to the preparation of the pre-sentence report), the defendant should expect that the
government will recommend that the Court impose a sentence consistent with the sentencing range set
forth by the sentencing guidelines. The defendant understands, however, that the ultimate determination
of an appropriate sentence will be up to the sentencing judge. The Court may impose a sentence which
exceeds, falls below, or is contained within the sentencing range prescribed by the sentencing
guidelines. The defendant expressly acknowledges that if the Court imposes a sentence outside the
range set forth in the sentencing guidelines, or otherwise different than the defendant expected, or
2

A -_A I . _ Case 1 :O8—cr-00076-SLR Document 13 Filed 08/O4/2008 Page 3 of 3
contrary to the recommendation of his attorney or the United States, the defendant will not be allowed
to withdraw his guilty plea on that basis.
7. It is further agreed by the parties that this Memorandum supersedes all prior promises,
representations, and statements ofthe undersigned parties; that this Memorandum may be modified only
in writing signed by all the parties; and that any and all promises, representations and statements made
prior to or after this Memorandum are null and void and have no effect whatsoever, unless they comport
with the subsequent written modification requirements of this paragraph.
COLM F. CONNOLLY
United States Attorney
By: -
Edson A. Bostic, Esquire Christopher J. Buré
tome for Defendant Assistant United States Attorney
>
été
o A. ` artinez
! · = dant
Dated:
AND NOW this 4*% day of , 2008, the foregoing Memorandum
of Plea Agreement is hereb accepted) reject d) by this Court.
Hohorable Sue L. gobinson
United States District Court
3

Case 1:08-cr-00076-SLR

Document 13

Filed 08/04/2008

Page 1 of 3

Case 1:08-cr-00076-SLR

Document 13

Filed 08/04/2008

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:08-cr-00076-SLR

Document 13

Filed 08/04/2008

Page 3 of 3