Free Plea Agreement - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

- Case 1:07-cr-00082-SLR Document 15 Filed O9_%9%%?'7? nwer;Co:1;j%qL_
`%»r WVU
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Plaintiff, 5
v. ) Criminal Action No. 07-82-SLR
SCOTT DAVID ROBINSON, g
Defendant. g
MEMORANDUM OF PLEA AGREEMENT
Pursuant to discussions between the United States of America, by and through its attorneys,
Edmond Falgowski, Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Delaware, and Colm F.
Connolly, United States Attomey for the District of Delaware, and the defendant, Scott David
Robinson, 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 enter a guilty plea to Count I5 ofthe Indictment, charging Distribution
of Child Pornography, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2252A(a)(I) and (b)(l),
which carries a maximum penalty of not less than 5 years imprisomnent and not more than 20 years
imprisonment, a $250,000.00 tine, a life tenn of supervised release, or any or all ofthe above, and a
special assessment of $100. At sentencing the United States will move to dismiss the remaining counts
of the Indictment.
2. The defendant acknowledges that the elements of the offense are as follows:
a. Acting knowingly
b. the defendant transmitted in interstate commerce
c. child pomography, defined as a visual depiction of a minor engaged in an actual
or simulated sex act and/or the lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area.

‘ Case 1:07-cr—OOO82-SLR Document 15 Filed O9/19/2007 Page 2 of 3
The defendant admits that on or about November 13, 2006, he had an online chat over the Intemet,
during which he transmitted images of child pornography.
3. The defendant agrees to pay the special assessment on the day of sentencing. If the Court
orders the payment of any fine as part of the defendant’s sentence, the defendant agrees voluntarily to
enter the Inmate 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 under U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(a). If the defendant’s
offense level is 16 or greater, the United States will move for an additional one point reduction,
pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3El .l(a) and (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 FBI agents on or about February 16,
2007.
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. Section 3553(a) in determining an appropriate
sentence. At this stage (prior to the preparation ofthe 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
2

. Case 1:07-cr-00082-SLR Document 15 Filed O9/19/2007 Page 3 of 3
expected, or 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. The Unit tates Attorney reserves the ` ; tto defend any ruling of the istrict Court should
5* there be an peal from this case. The de · dant knows that he has, and untarily waives, the right
to fi any appeal, any collateral at { , or any other writ or motion er sentencing — including tnot
QD imited to, an appeal unc?/IS U.S.C. § 3742 or a motion @@28 U.S.C. § 2255 — ex pt that the
defendant reserves ` right to appeal based on a clginiidiat (l) defendant’s sent ce exceeded the
statutory max` um, (2) the sentencing judge er1)o¢é>usly departed upwards fr the guidelines range
or (3) his counsel provided ineffective assistance.
8. It is further agreed by the parties that this Memorandum supersedes all prior promises,
representations, and statements ofthe undersigned parties; that this Memorandum maybe 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.
COL . CONNO Y
U JFF im /7L
_1
By; ‘ Vi
dson A. Bostic, Esquire •` ond Falgows
Attorney for Defendant Assistant United tates Attorney
z

Scott David Robinson, efendant
Dated:T’ " 6 7
AND NOW this i 9*** day of , 2007, the foregoing
Memorandum of Plea Agreement is hereby ) (rejected) by this Court.
United States District Court
3