October 18, 2011
Case Results for criminal client attempted purchase of oxycodone

Charge:    attempted purchase of oxycodone
Palm Beach Judge:        Karen Miller
Disposition:    charges dropped June 28, 2011


Cases

2011CF001900AXXXMB
Charge:    possession of cocaine
Judge:        Kastrenakes
Disposition:    After motion to suppress filed, state dropped charges on 9/19/11 


Cases

2010CF009598AMB
Charge:    possession of schedule II substance; evidence tampering
Judge:        Rapp
Disposition:    Motion to suppress granted.  Case dropped on 7/5/11


Cases

2011CT000012AXXXMB
Charge:    DUI
Judge:        Marni Bryson
Disposition:    Motion to suppress granted.  Case dropped on

"Kinapping of a child"... more coming from Grey soon

Passionate. Caring. Truthful.

855-TESH-LAW

*855-837-4529

561-686-6886

Federal Sentencing Guidelines – Preliminary Determination of Inability to Pay Fine

As seen on:

Grey Tesh

1610 Southern Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL
33406

Board Certified Criminal Trial Specialist
(561) 686-6886

2010 FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES MANUAL

CHAPTER EIGHT – SENTENCING OF ORGANIZATIONS

PART C – FINES

2.DETERMINING THE FINE – OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

§8C2.2. Preliminary Determination of Inability to Pay Fine

(a)Where it is readily ascertainable that the organization cannot and is not likely to become able (even on an installment schedule) to pay restitution required under §8B1.1 (Restitution – Organizations), a determination of the guideline fine range is unnecessary because, pursuant to §8C3.3(a), no fine would be imposed.

(b)Where it is readily ascertainable through a preliminary determination of the minimum of the guideline fine range (see §§8C2.3 through 8C2.7) that the organization cannot and is not likely to become able (even on an installment schedule) to pay such minimum guideline fine, a further determination of the guideline fine range is unnecessary. Instead, the court may use the preliminary determination and impose the fine that would result from the application of §8C3.3 (Reduction of Fine Based on Inability to Pay).

Commentary

Application Notes:

1.In a case of a determination under subsection (a), a statement that "the guideline fine range was not determined because it is readily ascertainable that the defendant cannot and is not likely to become able to pay restitution" is recommended.

2.In a case of a determination under subsection (b), a statement that "no precise determination of the guideline fine range is required because it is readily ascertainable that the defendant cannot and is not likely to become able to pay the minimum of the guideline fine range" is recommended.

Background. Many organizational defendants lack the ability to pay restitution. In addition, many organizational defendants who may be able to pay restitution lack the ability to pay the minimum fine called for by §8C2.7(a). In such cases, a complete determination of the guideline fine range may be a needless exercise. This section provides for an abbreviated determination of the guideline fine range that can be applied where it is readily ascertainable that the fine within the guideline fine range determined under §8C2.7 (Guideline Fine Range – Organizations) would be reduced under §8C3.3 (Reduction of Fine Based on Inability to Pay).

Historical Note: Effective November 1, 1991 (see Appendix C, amendment 422).

(EFFECTIVE November 1, 2010)


United States Sentencing Commission