According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, the indictment alleges that Anibal Luis Rodriguez a/k/a “Lou,” age 26, of Pottsville, Malcom Wilfong a/k/a “Sleep,” age 26, of Pottsville, David Castro a/k/a “D,” age 27, of Pottsville, and Laverne Schaeffer, age 45, of Schuylkill Haven, conspired to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The indictment further alleges that Rodriguez, Wilfong, and Castro were involved in distributing more than 500 grams of methamphetamine. Schaeffer is alleged to have distributed more than 50 grams of methamphetamine.
Rodriguez and Castro are also charged with five additional counts of distributing methamphetamine. Wilfong is also charged with an additional count of distributing methamphetamine.
The indictment also seeks to forfeit the residence and property of Laverne Schaeffer in Schuylkill Haven, Pennsylvania.
The case is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania State Police, and the Shenandoah Police. Assistant U.S. Attorney Francis P. Sempa is prosecuting the case.
Indictments and Criminal Informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.
A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
The maximum penalty under federal law for conspiracy to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine is life imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. There is also a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years for that offense. The maximum penalty under federal law for conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine is 40 years in prison. There is a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison for that charge. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant's educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.