United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
POLSTER CHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court is the United States' Motion for Reduction in
Sentence Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
35(b). (Doc. 237). Defendant Robert Fedyna has not responded,
and the time to do so has expired. For the below reasons, the
Court grants the motion.
November 7, 2016, the Court sentenced Fedyna to 135
months' imprisonment, a low-end Guidelines' range
sentence, for wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering.
(Doc. 111). The Court later reduced Fedyna's sentence
three levels under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b)
because of his assistance in prosecuting his co-conspirator.
(Doc. 212). The Amended Judgment, dated March 29, 2018,
imposed a 97-month term of imprisonment. (Doc. 216). The
Government moves again to reduce Fedyna's sentence two
levels and recommends a sentence of 78 months because of his
substantial assistance in prosecuting four defendants in
another mail fraud conspiracy. (Doc. 237).
the Government's motion, a district court may reduce a
sentence if the defendant provided substantial assistance.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b); United States v. Mora, 703
Fed.Appx. 836, 843 (11th Cir. 2017) (stating a court may
reduce a sentence “only to reflect a defendant's
subsequent, substantial assistance in the investigation or
prosecution of another person” (quotation marks
omitted)). The reduction may even occur more than one year
after sentencing if the defendant's substantial
assistance involved one of three circumstances:
(A) information not known to the defendant until one year or
more after sentencing;
(B) information provided by the defendant to the government
within one year of sentencing, but which did not become
useful to the government until more than one year after
(C) information the usefulness of which could not reasonably
have been anticipated by the defendant until more than one
year after sentencing and which was promptly provided to the
government after its usefulness was reasonably apparent to
Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b)(2). The court has discretion to grant
or deny motions to reduce sentences. See United
States v. Manella, 86 F.3d 201, 205 (11th Cir. 1996).
has again provided substantial assistance to merit a sentence
reduction. Fedyna helped three federal agencies investigate
and prosecute another wire fraud conspiracy involving losses
over $511 million. He provided information on hundreds of
documents related to the conspiracy, testified before the
grand jury, and was prepared to testify at trial. And
“[t]he government disclosed Fedyna's proffered
statements to the Kingston defendants, which contributed to
those defendants pleading guilty.” (Doc. 237 at 3). And
the Court will consider a reduction this late because
Fedyna's information did not become useful until more
than one year after the sentencing, as the Kingston
defendants were not indicted until 2018. The Court thus finds
a two-level reduction to be reasonable based on Fedyna's
finding results in a total offense level of 28, a criminal
history category of I, and a Sentencing Guidelines' range
of 78 to 97 months. Based on this calculation, the Court
finds a sentence of 78 months' imprisonment to be
sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with
the purposes of sentencing. All other parts of Fedyna's
sentence remain as originally imposed.
it is now
Government's Motion for Reduction in Sentence Pursuant to
Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) (Doc. 237) is
Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter a
second amended judgment reducing the sentence imposed to 78
months' imprisonment as to Defendant Robert Fedyna, ...