Full text
Datta v. United States
Memorandum Endorsement United States v. Datta, 11-cr-0102. 14-cv-8653 (LAK) Vikram Datta, an apparently indefatigable pro se litigant, endlessly attacks his longsince affirmed’ convictions for conspiracies to commit money laundering and to travel internationally in aid of racketeering. He now purports to move pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (““FOIA)”) —both in the long-since completed criminal case and ina now concluded civil docket assigned to a Section 2255 motion’ — “for clarification & solicitation of the records supporting jurisdiction of the government to prosecute the petitioner and ruling(s) of the honorable court.” The application is DENIED. Among other reasons supporting this result that need not be stated here, are these: First, neither of the cases in which Datta has filed this purported action remain pending. If he wishes to file an action for relief under FOIA, he must commence a new civil action in an appropriate venue and, absent in forma pauperis relief, pay the requisite filing fee. Second, the clarification and records Datta purports to seek would be from the court. A FOIA request, however, must be directed to an “agency” of the United States government. 5 U.S.C. § 552 , passim. The statutory definition of “agency” specifically and explicitly excludes “the coutts of the United States.” fd. § 551(1)(B).
SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 2, 2024 Lewis A. Kaplan casey onl United States District Judge
\ SEI TUT ST TEND erg peed United States v. Datta, No. 12-647-cr (2d Cir. filed Feb. 21, 2013). No. 14-8653 (S.D.N.Y. filed Nov. 3, 2014).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YOK (SDNY)
VHCRAM DATTA
PETITIONER
V. CASE: 11-cr-0102; 11-cr-0102-LAK; 14-cv-8653-(LAK)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
RESPONDENT
5 USC Section 552 (a) Motion for Clarification & Solicitation of the Records Supporting Jurisdiction of the Government to Prosecute the Petitioner and Ruling(s} of the Honorable Court’
VIKRAM DATTA, prose USM # 64542054 7512 Delfina Drive Laredo, TX. 78041
To The Cierk of the District Court 500 Pearl Street New York, NY, 10007 Case: 11-cr-0102; 11-cr-0102-LAK; 14-cv-8653-LAK.
CLEERK OF THE COURT: Enclosed please find my “5 USC Section 552(a} Motion for Clarification &Solicitatian of the Records Supporting Jurisdiction of the Government to Prosecute the Petitioner and Ruling(s} of the Honorable Court” that | have prepared pro-se. Kindly file my motion, and as | am in home confinement, please send any and ail mailings to me at the address below my signature line.
Thanks for your assistance and courtesies, Respectfully Submitted
hers Dall 24 24 Vikram Datta pro-se, Date USM# 64542054 7512 Delfina Dr. Laredo, TX. 78044
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YOK (SDNY)
VIKRAM DATTA
PETITIONER
V. CASE: 11-cr-00102; 11-cr-0102-LAK; 14-cv-8653 (LAK}
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
RESPONDENT
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned, pro se, hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the “5 USC Section 552(a) Motion for Clarification & Solicitation of the Records Supporting Jurisdiction of the Government to Prosecute the Petitioner and Ruling(s} of the Honorable Court” has been mailed to the United States Attorney's Office (SDNY) at 1 Saint Andrew’s Plaza, New York, NY 10007, by depositing a copy of the Motion for First Class United States Postal mailing.
Respectfully Submitted,
□□□ ~ Doth | /25/24 Vikram Datta, pro-se, Date USM # 64542054 7512 Delfina Dr. Laredo, TX. 78041,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (SDNY)
VIKRAM DATTA
PETITIONER
V. Case # 11-CR-0102; 11-CR-0102-LAK; 14-cv-8653(LAK).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
RESPONDENT
5 U.S.C. SECTION 552(a) MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION & SOLICITATION OF THE
RECORDS SUPPORTING JURISDICTION OF THE GOVERNMENT TO PROSECUTE THE
PETITIONER AND RULING(S) OF THE HONORABLE COURT.
TO THE HONORABLE COURT: COMES NOW, i, VIKRAM DATTA, prose, hereafter ‘PETITIONER’ moves the Honorable Court with this “S U.S.C. Section 552{a} Motion for Clarification & Solicitation of the Records Supporting Jurisdictian of the Government to Prosecute the Petitioner and Ruling (s) of the Honorable Court.” The petitioner respectfully states the following:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Petitioner respectfully requests to this Honorable Court to construe prose pleadings of petitioner liberally. Please see Harris v, Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), Walker v. Schultz, 727 F. 3d 119
(2d Cr, 2013), Estelle v. Gamble 429 US 97 , 98 {1976}, and interpret them to raise the “strangest [claims] That they suggest “ Triestman v. Fed, Bureau of Prison 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006}.
RULINGS OF THE HONORABLE COURT SINCE 2016
1. - On 6/1/2016 the Honorable Court Ruled in Case: 1:11-cr-00102-LAK (1) Valdez who pled guilty to drug related offense on 8/18/2011 was not charged as a co-defendant with the petitioner; only Faustino Garza-Gonzalez from now on Garza-Gonzalez and Datta were charged in this case; (2) The conviction of The petitioner on the 51 indictment: $1 11 Cr. 102 (LAK} filed on 8/9/2011 in Case: 11-cr-0102,
2, On 10/13/2016 the Honorable Court amended imprisonment and sentencing orders for the petitioner from Case #1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK) for offense on 1/31/2011 in February 8, 2011 1st amended judgment bearing Case; 1 (S2}11-CR-0102-01 {LAK) from Counts (S2}Two & (S2)Three, ta Count (S1} Two & Count (S1)Three in Case; 11-cr-0102-LAK for an Offense on 1/31/2011 in 2nd amended judgment bearing Case: 1: (S1]11-CR-0102-01 (LAK). The petitioner was not resentenced on Counts (S1) Two and (S1) Three in Case; 11-cr-0102. PSR, Sentencing Computation Data, and Statement of Reasons for the sentencing of the petitloner remained on Case# 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK) for an offense on 1/31/2011. 3, On 10/23/2018, the Honorable Court denied 192 Motion te provide the petitioner with ‘Original indictment’ on which he had been sentenced on 1/20/2012 and the indictments in which the Honorable Court amended the judgments for the Count ($2) Two and Count (S2} Three on 2/8/2012 bearing Case# 1(S2)11-CR-0102-01 (LAK) & for Counts (S1)Two and (S1)Three bearing Case#(S1)11-CR-0102-01 (LAK) on 10/13/2016 for the conspiracy of the offense charged in the Counts Two and Three from Case # 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK) for an offense that happened on 1/31/2011 without prejudice to any civil action pursuant to the 701A. 4. On 1/25/2022 the order of the Honorable Court Ruled (1} the petitioner was charged, tried and sentenced only in 11-cr-0102 and only on the $1 indictment, (2) the original indictment was filed on February 3, 2011, and a first superseding indictment (“S1”) was filed on August 9, 2011, Datta was the only defendant and was named in both. On August 23, 2011, a second superseding indictment (“S2”) was filed that charged a second defendant as well as Datta, one Faustino Garza-Gonzalez, Datta was arraigned on September 7, 2011, but the minute order makes abundantly clear that Datta would be tried commencing on September 12, 2011 on $1, not $2: And Datta in fact was tried in September 2011 on $1 with the results clarified in the Conviction and Sentence on the first page; conspiring to launder money represented by undercover agents to be the proceeds of drug trafficking (Count One), conspiring to launder the proceed of drug trafficking (Count Two), and conspiring to travel in interstate and foreign commerce in aid of money laundering {Count Three); (3) convictions were affirmed, United States v. Garza-Gonzalez, 512 Fed. Appx. 60 (2d Cir. 2013}; and {4) 69-cr-949 is the number of a case in which two witnesses who cooperated against Datta were charged, but in which Datta never was a party.
ISSUES PRSENTED
1. CLARIFICATION AND SOLICITATION OF THE RECORD FOR THE MONEY LAUNDERING OFFENSE IN
WHICH THE PETITIONER CONSPIRED TO LAUNDER THE PROCEEDS OF DRUG TRAFFICKING FOR
WHICH THE PETITIONER WAS ARRESTED OWN 1/15/2011, TRIED ON 9/12/2011, CONVICTED ON 9/27/2011, AND SENTENCED ON 1/20/20122 IN THE 51 INDICTMENT IN CASE: 11-cr-0102. 2. CLARIFICATEION AND SOLICITATION OF THE HARD COPY OF THE S1 INDICTMENT IN WHICH THE
HONORABLE APPEAL COURT AFFIRMED THE FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AMENDED JUDGMENT IN
UNITED STATES v. GARZA-GONZALEZ, 512 Appx 60 (2d Cir. 2013) FOR AN OFFENSE ON 1/31/2011. 3. CLARIFICATION WHETHER THE $2 INDICTMENT IN CASE: 11-Cr-0102 IN WHICH THE PETITIONER WAS CHARGED, TRIED AND SENTENCED WAS A DEFECTIVE INDICTMENT, THAT FALSELY CHARGED THE PETITIONER FOR THE CONSPIRACY TO LAUNDER THE PROCEEDS OF THE DRUG TRAFFICKING FROM JUNE 2009 TO JANUARY 2011 FOR AN OFFENSE ON 1/31/2011 IN CASE: 11-CR-578 (VM). 4, CLARIFICATION OF THE PROBABLE CAUSE FOR THE ARREST OF THE PETITIONER ON 1/15/2011.
STATEMENT FACTS
in or around June of 2009, DEA AGENTS in New Jersey commenced the investigation of perfume businesses in NY, NJ and Laredo, TX., after arresting Ajay Gupta and Ankur Gupta from now on Guptas owners of perfume business Nandansons Intl in Edison, NJ. Guptas accepted cash money from hispanic national (s} in the parking lots of other businesses. Guptas introduced DEA agents to the petitioners as their Mexican perfume customer in August 2010. Guptas were arrested in Case: 10 CR 252 (RJS) for conspiring to launder the proceed of drug trafficking from 1997 to 2009 in NY and NJ. DEA agents arrested the petitioner on 1/15/2011 pursuant to the Criminal Complaint 11 MAG 108 for Count One in Case: 1:11-mj-0108-UA for conspiring to launder drug money charged in Count One from October 2009 to January 2011 alleging... On October 5-6, 2010 one company owned by petitioner wired over $100,000 to three perfume dealers in New York, NY. Arrest Warrant 11 MAG 108 was signed by someone for Magistrate judge Honorable Debra Freeman. In May 2017, the Clerk of the court sent petitioner another arrest warrant: 11 MAG 108 signed by Magistrate Judge Honorable Debra Freeman, (Exhibit-1-2} The government filed Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 on 2/3/2011 charging the petitioner for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from Mexico to USA from October 2009 to January 15, 2011 with allegation-On October 5-6, 2010 petitioner sent over $100,000 to three different perfume dealers in New York with wire transfers in the conspiracy to launder drug money from Mexico to USA in SDNY (Count One); and conspiring to launder money represented by undercover agents to be the proceeds of the drug trafficking from October 2009 to January 2011. (Count Two} The government did net hold the probable cause hearing on 2/8/2011, after filing the Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 on 2/3/2011. The Indictment 11 CRIM 102 was filed on 2/3/2011 from Case: 11-m}-00108-UA, The indictment: 11 CRIM 102 was Designated as Case: 11-cr-102 on 2/3/2011. Case: 11-mj-00108-UA was merged in Case! 11-cr-0102 when the Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 was filed on 2/3/2011. The Honorable Court arraigned the petitioner on indictment: 11 CRIM 102 on 2/10/2011. 3 .
On 8/9/2011 the government filed $1 Indictment: $1 11 Cr, 102 {LAK} in Case: 11-cr-0102 charging petitioner for conspiring to launder money represented by undercover agents to be the proceeds of the drug trafficking from August 2010 to January 2011 (Count One); conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from Mexico to USA in SDNY from June 2009 to January 2011 (Count Two); & conspiring to travel interstate and foreign commerce In aid of money laundering from June 2609 to January 2011 in (Count Three); and on 8/23/2011 filed the second superseding $2 Indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102 that charged the petitioner and Garza-Gonzalez for same conspiracies from June 2009 ta January 2011 in Count Two and Count Three, The Honorable Court ruled on 6/1/2016 in Case: 11-cr-102-LAK; only Garza-Gonzalez and Datta (petitioner) were charged in this case. Garza-Gonzalez operated/managed a currency exchange business for HHario Martinez-Garcia from now on Hilario In Nuevo Laredo in Mexico. Garza-Gonzalez exchanged Peso for US Dollars for Mexican perfume customers in Mexico, Hilario brought US Dollars from Garza-Gonzalez in Mexico to Laredo In USA, Hilario declared US Dollars to the Custom Officers at Port of Entry in Laredo, TX, prior to ma king payments from Mexican perfume customers to the perfurne businesses in Laredo, TX, (USA) including petitioner's business La Versailles In Laredo (USA). Hilario was arrested in Laredo, TX., on 1/18/2011 by the government for Conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from June 2009 to January 2011 in Case: 11-cr-0578 (VIV)}. Hilarfo pleaded guilty to conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from June 2009 to January 2011 on 7/8/2011 in Case: 11 CR 578 (VM) that was reassigned on 3/20/2012 to the District Judge Honorable Lewls A. Kaplan (LAK). The petitioner was not charged for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug of drug trafficking in SDNY in Case: 14-cr-578 (VM). Hilarlo was sentenced on 3/23/2012 for 1956 (h} Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering in Count One for an offense ended on 1/31/2011 in Case: 11-cr-578 (VM), (Document 35 filed on 3/29/2012 in Case: 1:11-cr-0578-LAK,) The Honorable Court clarified—only the petitioner and Garza-Gonzalez were charged In Case: 11-cr-0102-LAK.
Government fabricated falsified indictment: $1 11 Cr, 102 {LAK) only to prosecute the petitioner for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from June 2009 to January 2011 charged in Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM) without Jurisdiction. On 8/9/2011 the government filed the DEFECTIVE first Superseding Indictment (S1) : $2 11 Cr, 102 (LAK) charging the petitioner, NOT Hilario for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of the drug trafficking from June 2009 to January 2011 in Case: 11 CR 578 (VM). The petitioner's attorney Diarrnuid White reviewed a S1 indictment of Hilario in June-July of 2011 with three counts in which the petitioner was charged as co-defendant in the indictment. Attorney White told the petitioner .. Count Three was derived and added for Hilarie bringing cash money from Mexico to USA for Garza-Gonzalez in Count Two. Hilario braught $6,7million from Garza-Gonzalez between June 2009 to January 18, 2011 that was calculated as loss amount in sentencing of petitioner, (ST-12) Garza-Gonzalez was arrested in Case: 11-cr-0102 In Laredo, TX, on 8/23/2011, On 8/26/2011, the Government fabricated and filed another falsified Indictment: $2 11 Cr, 102 (LAK) with three counts, in which the petitioner and Garza-Gonzalez were charged for same conspiracies in Case: 11-cr-578 (VM) that were charged in Counts 2,3 of the $1 Indictment: $1 11 Cr. 102 (LAK) to which Garza-Gonzalez pleaded not guilty on 8/26/2011. Garza-Gonzalez pleaded guilty to conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from 2007 to October 2011 on 9/8/2011. Garza-Gonzalez told AUSA Skinner on $9/9/2011-Garza-Gonzalez started dealing with Alberto who had dirty US dollars in Mexico City from middle of the January-February of 2011 i.e. after the arrest of the petitioner on 1/15/2011, (Exhibit-3) On 9/27/2011 plea of Garza-Gonzalez was backdated from 9/8/2014 to 9/4/2011 when the petitioner was found guilty on $4.11 Cr. 102 (LAK). (Exhibit-4) During the trial, the Honorable Court Instructed the jury to disregard Garza-Gonzalez’s belief of money In Mexico to be drag money. (T-578) Garza-Gonzalez was sentenced for 18 USC 1956(h) Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering in Count (83) One; and 18 USC 371 Conspiracy to Travel Internationally in Aid of Racketeering Enterprises in Count ($3) Two for an offense ended on 8/31/2011,
On 6/28/2012, Garza-Gonzalez's guilty plea was amended from Counts Two and Three of the $2 Indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102 (from Case: 11-cr-578 (VM)) for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from Mexico to USA in the SDNY from June 2009 to January 2011, to Counts 1s & 2s of Garza-Gonzalez for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from 2007 to October 2011 in Case: 11-cr-0102-LAK. (DE-111, 112) On 8/18/2011, the government held arraignment on two set of Counts: 1-2, 15-25, 35, 155-255, 355 in Case! 11-cr-0102 for the defendants who conspired to launder the proceed of drug trafficking in SDNY including but not limited to Hilario in Case: 12 CR 578 (VM) and Garza-Gonzalez in Case: 11-cr-0102 before Magistrate Judge Honorable Andrew J, Peck with a defendant VALDEZ. Only petitioner’s jury trial was set before this Honorable Court on 9/12/2011. (DE-33) The petitioner was not arraigned on either set of Counts: 1-2, 1s-2s, 3s, 1ss-2ss, 3ss in Case: 11-cr-0102 on 8/18/2011, In this case of the petitioner DEA agent Recinos was the only SINALOA CARTEL actor posing as drug dealer and money launderer for the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico, Recinos failed in getting the petitioner to launder the drug money from USA to Colombia for Sinaloa Cartel. Recinos wanted to use VALDEZ code name to call petitioner & falled in getting petitioner to accept over $150,000 in cash on 9/18/2010 from ‘contact in NJ and NY to buy perfumes from the petitioner in TX, AZ, and CA. On 9/24/2010 Recinos sent $50,000 with wire transfer to petitioner's perfume company “La Versailles” in Laredo, TX., that was returned to the sending bank with wire transfer on 9/29/2010, In early October of 2010, a cooperating witness (CW) delivered over $100,000 in cash to three perfume businesses in NJ & NY including Perfume Unlimited in SDNY arranged by Virender Sharma owner of T M Perfumes located in Laredo, TX. On or around November 18, 2010 (CW) Ankur Gupta failed in getting the petitioner to accept cash from his Mexican Customer (DEA agents) in Laredo, and launder to NJ. Recinos was the only SINALOA actor who laundered “Sinaloa Money” for that reason on December 7, 2010 petitioner used rant it’s all Sinaloa Money & 90 % for Recino’s drug money that he tried to launder through petitioner’s business from USA
to Colombla, or Mexico te USA; and his contact/code VALDEZ was present in arraignment on 8/18/2011 of the defendants who laundered drug money in SDNY, On 9/7/11 petitioner’s attorneys informed the petitioner that the government superseded the $1 indictment of Hilario, with S2 indictment of Garza-Gonzalez and waived the grand jury approval for the $2 Indictment to go on trial, The Honorable Court arraigned the petitioner on a $2 indictment and declared it defective, and then ruled 9/12/2011 trial of petitioner will proceed on $1 indictment, and sentencing will be held on $2 indictment. The petitioner was arraigned on another $2 Indictment, NOT on the $1 indictment on which he had to stand trial on 9/12/2011, (DE-40) The government concealed $2 & $2 counts of Hilario and Garza-Gonzalez in Case: 14-cr-0578 (VM); and Case: 11-cr-0102-LAK in S1 & S2 Dockets of Case: 11-cr-0102. The government filed three tempered indictments: 11 CRIM 102, $1 & $2 from one set of Counts: 1-2, 1s-2s, 3s, 1ss-2ss, 35s in $1 Docket in Case: 11-cr-0102 for Hilario’s conspiracy to launder the proceed of drug trafficking with Garza-Gonzalez from June 2009 te January 2011 in Case: 14-cr-0578 (VM), Government did not file GHOST Indictments from other set of Count: 1-2, is-2s, 3s, 1ss-2ss, 3ss in S2 Docket in Case: 11-cr-O102 for Garza-Gonzatez's conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY for offenses on 1/31/2011 & 8/31/2011, On 12/20/2011 in Rule 29 and Rule 33 Motion argument the Honorable court granted a judgment of acquittal on Count One and Count ($1) One, and denied judgment of acquittal on Counts Two and Three and Counts ($2) Two and ($1) Three of two (2) $1 Indictments evident in (2) two docket entries for Rule 29 Motion arguments. {DE-75) The Honorable Court denied the acquittal citing the following transaction between the petitioner and Garza-Gonzalez: Rule 29-T-9 Line-8: THE COURT: The agreement was to take the money from Garza and give him back perfumes. So the Knowledge is satisfied by Mr. Datta’s 90 percent certainty that it is drug money. That shows that he knows that what he’s doing laundering drug money, and the fact that he takes the cash and supplies with perfumes demonstrate the agreement. This transaction did not take place and did not exist in trial record. On 1/20/2012 The petitioner was sentenced on counts Two and Three of Garza-Gonzalez and Hilario.
[7] ST-48: MR. WHITE: But consider this, that m y argument was directed to the counts of conviction, Count Two and Three of the money essentially from Fausto Garcia and Hilaria Martinez, what his statement of mine was with that. The Honorable court dismissed all open Indictments and counts of those indictments for the petitioner on the motion of the government after sentencing on Counts 2s, 3s. Counts 1-2, 1s, 155-2ss, 3ss were dismissed. {DE-87} ST-55, LIne-24; MR. SKINNER; Not, with regard to the sentence but there are other indictments against the defendant. We would (ST-56) move to dismiss all counts of those indictments. THE COURT: Granted. Thank you, counse!, Counts One, Two and Three belonged to Garza-Gonzalez in Case: 11-cr-0102-LAK; and Hilario in Case: 11-CR-578 (VM) for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking with “SOMEONE” in SDNY in Case: 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK). The Sentencing Computation Data and Statement of Reasons for the petitioner are prepared on Count Two, and Count Three in Case# 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK} for a offense on 1/31/2011. Please see information from Sentencing Computation Data for the petitioner. {Exhibit-5) Petitioner's Sentencing Orders in Case: 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK); and convictions in February 8, 2012 amended judgment were affirmed for an offense on 1/31/2011 in United States v. Garza-Gonzalez, 512 Fed Appx, 60 (2d Cir. 2013} US Marshal delivered the petitioner to FCI Bastrop on 02/29/2012 pursuant to Imprisonment Order on Defendant Case Number: 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK} for an offense on 1/31/2011. The authenticity of the document Is evidenced-Fax # (212) 637-6132 of US Marshals Office in the middle of the top of the page 1/19 of Document 90.(Exhibit-6) Petitioner submits his Sentence Monitor Data as of 2/3/2014 as evidence in support with the same FBI # 474001 XAI as in Sentencing Computation Data, PSR, and Home Confinement Document. (Exhiblt-7) The Honorable Court amended the judgment for a second time on 10/13/2016 from $2 Counts to §1 Counts in Case: 11-cr-0102 for the offense on 1/31/2011 without resentencing the petitioner, that deprived him to file direct appeal for Jurisdictional Viclations and Defective Indictment.
PLEADINGS
The government added name of the petitioner without Jurisdiction in the counts of Hllario’s and Garza-Gonzalez's conspiracies to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY in thelr respective Cases: 11-cr-0578 (VM); and 11-cr-0102-LAK, Government filed tempered / falsified Indictments: 11 CRIM 102; $1 and S2 from Garza-Gonzalez’s Case: 11-cr-0102; and Hilario’s Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM}. Petitioner was not party to Garza-Gonzalez’s Case: 11-cr-0102; & Hilario’s Case: 11-cr-578 (VM). The government fabricated falsified Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 on 2/3/2011 without grand jury scrutiny of Jurisdiction over the petitioner ONLY not to hold prebable cause hearing on 2/8/2011 for the arrest of the petitioner on 1/15/2011, The government tampered Indictments: 11 CRIM 102, $1 and $2 only to prosecute the petitioner for Hilario’s conspiracy to launder the proceed of the drug trafficking from June 2009 to January 2011 without jurisdiction for money laundering offense on 1/31/2011. In the Order on 6/1/2016 the Honorable Court ruled in Case: 1:11-cr-00102-LAK- only Datta and Garza-Gonzalez were charged in this case. Garza-Gonzatez did not have drug money in Mexico between June 2009 to January 2011 in Count One of the Original Indictment: 11 CRIM 102, and Counts Twe and Three of the $1 Indictment filed on 8/9/2011, and $2 indictment filed on 8/23/2011 in Case: 11-cr-0102. Garza-Gonzalez did not start dealings with ALBERTO in Mexico City, who had dirty US Doilars until after mid January-February of 20114 i.e. after the arrest of the petitioner in the SDNY on 1/15/2011, Hilario did not bring drug money from Garza-Gonzalez to petitioner's business La Versailles Fragrances Inc located in Laredo from Mexico between June 2009 to January 2011. Petitioner did not send drug money to any perfume business in USA or in the SDNY on October 5-6, 2010 in Count One of indictment: 11 CRIM 102 between October 2005 to January 2011: & Count Two and Three between June 2009 to January 2011 of §1 & $2 Indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102; the Honorable Court instructed the jury during trial to disregard Garza-Gonzalez’s belief, his money in Mexico was drug money. (T-578); thus Indictments: 11 CRIM 102; §1 & $2 filed in Case: 11-cr-0102 were defective for two reasons; (1) Hilario did not bring drug money
from Garza-Gonzalez from Mexico to USA that petitioner sent to the SONY on October 5-6, 2010, & (2) the petitioner was not party to Hllario’s conspiracy in SONY from June 2009 to January 2011, and was not party to the offense on 1/31/2011 in Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM). The government manufactured an illegitimate case against the petitioner with the fabrication of falsified and tampered paper documents, NOT for any drug money laundering offense committed by the petitioner. The petitioner was charged and arrested on 1/15/2011 for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from October 2009 to January 15, 2011 in Count One of Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 filed 2/3/2011. Count One was dismissed on 12/20/2011 In Rule 29 motion proceeding. The government neither filed nor tried the petitioner on the ($1) Indictment of Garza-Gonzalez for Conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from 2007 to October 2011 in which the Honorable Appeal Court affirmed the February 8, 2012 amended judgment in United States v. GarzaGonzalez, 512 Fed Appx, 60 (2d Cir. 2013) for an offense on 1/31/2011 in Case: 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK). Garza-Gonzalez’s exchanging the Mexican Pesos, to/for US Dollars in Mexico did not implicate the petitioner in Garza-Gonzalez’s conspiracy to launder proceeds of the drug trafficking in SDNY; Hilario’s travelling internationally from Mexico to USA with legitimate money for Garza-Gonzalez to petitioner's business “La Versailles Fragrances Inc.” in Laredo, TX did not Implicate the petitioner for Conspiring to Travel Internationally in Ald of the Racketeering Enterprises from Mexico to USA in the offense on 1/31/2011 in SDNY In Case: 11-cr-0102; and/or 14-cr-0578 (VIM). The petitioner was tried on DEFECTIVE $1 indictment: $1 11 Cr. 102 (LAK) falsified and tampered by government only to prosecute petitioner without JURISDICTION for Hilario’s conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking from June 2009 to January 2011 in Case: 11 CR 578 (VM) for the offense on 1/31/2011. Trial record & PSR did not have reference to a offense in which the petitioner conspired with Hilarlo in Case: 11 CR 578 (VM); or Garza-Gonzalez in Case: 21-CR-102 (LAK) to launder money in SBNY on 1/31/2011, There can’t be conspiracy without any offense in which drug money was laundered.
[10] The Honorable Court Ruled In 1/25/2022 order... 69-cr-949 is the number of a case in which two witnesses who cooperated against the petitioner were charged, but in which DATTA the petitioner was never a party. The PSR, Sentencing Computation Data and Statement of Reasons for petitioner are for the offenses in Counts Two and Three in Case# 1:09-CR-949-02 {LAK) for an offense on 1/31/2011. The petitioner was arrested pursuant to falsified arrest Warrant 11 MAG 108 on 1/15/2011 for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from October 2009 to January 15, 2011. The petitioner was kidnapped in SONY on 1/15/2011, abducted to New Jersey and was held hostage in Passaic County Jail till 1/18/2011. When the petitioner refused to plead guilty for a crime he did not commit & told DEA Special Agent John Post about (CW) making cash payments to perfume businesses in NY and NJ In early October 2010 arranged by SHARMA owner of a perfume business TM Perfumes in Laredo, TX. Agent Post told the petitioner — he knew and petitioner has to plead guilty for laundering drug money and lead the agents to arrest SHARMA. The petitioner refused to plead guilty, government circumvented the fabrication of tempered / falsified documents process including but not limited to arrest warrants, and indictments from cases including but not limited to 11-m]J-0108-UA; 11-cr-0578; and 14-cr-0102 only to prosecute the petitioner without jurisdiction, The government fabricated tempered / edited transcripts for the arraignments on 8/18/2011 and 9/7/2011. The government removed Hilario with his guilty plea on 7/8/2011; and Garza-Gonzalez with his guilty plea on 9/8/2011 from Si & $2 indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102. The government amended guilty plea of Garza-Gonzalez from Counts Two and Three of 52 Indictment filed in Case: 11-cr-0102 for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking with Hilario in SDNY June 2008 to January 2011 in Case: 11-cr-578 (VM) to Counts 1 & 2 of Case: 11-CR-102-LAK on 6/28/2012. On 8/26/2011 GarzaGonzalez entered plea of not guilty to Counts 2 & 3 in S2 Indictment before Magistrate Judge Honorable James C. Francis, (DE-51} Hilario and Garza-Gonzalez waived indictment, NOT petitioner. The Honorable Court Ruled on 1/25/2022 ... The petitioner was charged, tried and sentenced
[11] in 11-cr-0102 and only on the $1 Indictment. The 51 Indictment in Case: 14-cr-0102 was DEFECTIVE that charged the petitioner without JURISICTION for conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from June 2009 to Fanuary 2011 in Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM) to which the petitioner was not party. The government even did not arraign the petitioner on the $1 Indictment in 11-cr-0102 knowing it was a tempered document, filed as Superseding indictment: $1 11 Cr, 102 (LAK) for Hilario’s conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM) for an offense ended on 1/31/2011. The petitioner was neither party to Hilario’s conspiracy in Case; 11 CR 578 (VIM); nor party to Garza-Gonzalez’s conspiracy in Case: 11 CR 102 (LAK); and/or Case: 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK) in which a money laundering offense arranged by the government using the cooperating witnesses on 1/31/2011 in the SDNY, Hilario was arrested on 1/18/2011 in Laredo, Texas for conspiring with “SOMEONE” fn the SONY tn the offense that ended on 1/31/2011 in Case: 14-cr-0578 (VM) arranged by the government. On 10/23/2018, the Honorable Court denied 192 Mation to provide the petitioner with ‘Original Indictment’ on which he had been sentenced on 1/20/2012 and the indictments in which the Honorable Court amended the judgments for the Count ($2) Two and Count (82) Three on 2/8/2012 bearing Case#t 1($2}11-CR-0102-01 {LAK) & for Counts (S1)Two and {S1)Three bearing Case#(S1)11-CR-0102-01 (LAK) on 10/13/2016 for the conspiracy of the offense charged in the Counts Twa and Three from Case # 1:09-CR-949-02 (LAK) for an offense that happened on 1/31/2011 without prejudice to any civil action pursuant to the 701A. The petitioner is not an attorney; he did not and still does not know what kind of civil action to pursue. The government did not try or give any $1 indictment in 14-cr-0102 in which the petitioner was charged as a co-defendant of Garza-Gonzalez, in which the Honorable Appeal Court affirmed the February 8, 2011 amended judgment with sentencing orders in Case: 1:09-CR-949-02(LAK) for an olfense on 1/31/2041 in United States v. Garza-Gonzalez, 512 Fed, Appx. 60 (2d Cir, 2013), The government maliciously Implicated the petitioner in this case of conspiracy to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in NJ & SDNY for refusing to plead guilty, One cooperating witness (CW) delivered the cash payments to three perfume businesses in early October 2010, in NJ, & NY arranged by Virender Sharma the owner of TM Perfumes In Laredo, TX; NOT by the petitioner VIKRAM DATTA
[12] owner of La Versailles. The government fabricated falsified / tempered documents, arrest warrants and indictments in multiple cases for different conspiracy periods; Case: 11-mj-010-UA for conspiracy period from October 2009 to January 15, 2011 in Count One; Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM) for Hilario’s conspiracy period from June 2009 to January 31, 2011; & Case: 11-cr-0102 for Garza-Gonzalez’s conspiracy period from 2007 to October 2011 in SONY. Government merged the petitianer’s Case: 11-m]-0108-UA in Case: 11-cr-0102 to file Original Indictment: 11 CRIM 102 on 2/3/2011, One Hispanic cooperating witness (CW) delivered cash payments to Nandansons Intl in Edison (NJ); and three perfume businesses in NJ & SDNY arranged by Virender Sharma owner of the TM Perfumes in Laredo, TX., In early October 2010. Agent Recinos wanted to use code VALDEZ to communicate with the petitioner to buy perfumes in August of 2010. VALDEZ was present before Magistrate Judge Honorable Andrew J Pack for the arraignment on 8/18/2011, The petitioner was not taken to court on 8/18/2011 for arraignment but only his Jury tral was set for 9/12/2011. The government knew, the petitioner was not Involved In money laundering activities of Guptas, Sharma, Hilario, and Garza-Gonzalez , but wrongly implicated him in the conspiracies in Case: 11-cr-0578 (VM); 21-cr-0102-LAK; and In other cases, This Honorable Court has been presiding over the petitioner’s case since 2/10/2011 & issued three judgments that Imposed forfeiture orders in the amount ef $40,000,000 in Count One and $29,505,265 in Counts Two and Three & imposed sentence for 235 Months in Count Two; and 60 Months in Count for an offense ended on 1/31/2011 In $1 Indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102. The petitioner was in jal! from 1/15/2011 onwards, he did not participate in the offense on 1/31/2011. The government did not give Money Laundering Report, Sentencing Computation Data, and Statement of Reasons for Sentencing to the petitioner till this day in 2024. These documents are seaied and the petitioner can’t and didn’t get them. The petitioner respectfully submits the following requests for reliefs related to his case under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. Section 552a. Please see the form. (Exhibit-8)
[13] REQUEST FOR RELIEFS
4. The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to clarify the money laundering offense committed by the petitioner In which the proceeds of drug trafficking were laundered for which the petitioner was arrested on 1/15/2011; tried on 9/12/2011; and was sentenced on 1/20/2012 in the §1 Indictment in Case: 1i-cr-0102, 2. The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to issue an order to the government to provide (1)The Probable Cause for the Arrest of the Petitioner on 1/15/2011, (2) Money Laundering Report, (3} The Statement of Reasons, and (4) Sentencing Cemputation Data to the petitioner. 3. The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to clarify whether the $1 Indictment fn 1i-cr-0102 was defective because the petitioner did not launder proceeds of drug trafficking; what is the difference between the S1 & (§1) indictment / Counts, (DE-53, 55, 75, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90) 4, The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to clarify with supporting evidence whether the $1 Indictment In Case: 11-cr-0102 was issued by the grand jury for the petitioner for conspiring to launder the proceeds of drug trafficking in SDNY from June 2009 to January 2011. 5, The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to provide the date, time, place, and the amount(s) of the transaction(s) between the petitioner and Faustino Garza~-Genzalez in which the petitioner accepted drug money and in return gave perfumes to Faustino Garza-Gonzalez for which the Honorable Court denied Rule 29 Motion Acquittal on Counts Two and Three of the $1 Indictment in Case: 11-cr-0102 on 12/20/2011. 6. The petitioner respectfully requests the Honorable Court to order the government to provide the Hard Copy of the $1 indictment In Case: 11-cr-0102, in which the Honarable Appeal Court affirmed the February 8, 2012 amended judgment in United States v. Garza-Gonzalez, 512 Fed. Appx, 60
(2d Cir, 2013) for the offense on 1/31/2011, |, VIKRAM DATTA, declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746 that the forgoing is true and correct to the best of my persona! knowledge and ability. COUNTY OF WEBB Respectfully Submitted
STATE OF TEXAS . .
\Vidvim Delt Wesseh Vikram Datta Date USM # 64542-054 7512 Delfina Drive Laredo, TX. 78040 EO8¢ On this the 22 day of Lihiiltty 2922, before me, a Notary in the State of Texas, appeared the Man, Vikram Datta who resides at 7512 Delfina Drive Laredo, TX. 78040 / sUlllitig, 4F . QOlENega” 4, fx uw sb So en 10 fo SR ARRY Be Ane, Notary Paiblic Se Ones wo =S; Xoo ee mit A Oh See 27 ee Ne FE □□□ OF ERAS 14 “Sty feggate” >
17, SODBE Peeayeaas
vou: te. □ i :
AUSA PETER SKINNER (212-637-2601)
. FXHI BIT — | GR 12 (Rov. yn WARRANT FOR ARREST
DISTRICT
United States District Court SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK |
DOCKET NO, MAGISTAATE'S CASE NO.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA oo 1 108
NAME'AND ADDRESS OF INDIVIDUAL T0 8 ARRESTED
VIKRAM DATTA
VIKRAM DATTA
WARRANT Isuen ON THE BASIS OF: O Order of Court
TO: UNITED! STATES MARSHAL OR ANY OTHER AUTHORIZED OFFICER YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to arrest the above-named person and bring that person before the United States District Court to anawer to the charge(s) listed below. rn
DESCRIPTION OF CUARGES
i Conspiracy (o Commit Money Laundering
IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES CODE TITLE SECTION
| 18 1956 we Slates Magistnn J NT are 5 ra 8 ff P “2? Southern Dig ew ae (ae bt
| RETURN | This warrant was received and executed with the arrest of the above-named person. BATE nem NAME AND TITLE OF ARRESTING OFFICER SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING OFHICER
DATE Note: The eng officer is directed to serve the attached copy of the charge on the defendant at the time this warrant is executed,
;
FILED OURS AUSA PETER SKINNER (212-637-2601
A P | JAN 1 4 201 Sy ada rayres L eee ae HE See ie. het □□ & 0. OF/N. in| WARRANTFOR ARREST □□□ HIBIT~ 2
DISTRICT
Huitod States Bistrict Gort | SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK { DOCKET NO, MAGISTRATE'S CASENO. □□ PNEED STATES OF AMERICA □□ | 11 MAG |108 | NAME AND ADDRESS OF INDIVIDUAL 10 BE ARRESTED
VIKRAM DATTA
VIKRAM DATTA
ISSUED ON THEBASISOF: Order of Court Q Indictment © Information XX Complaint DISTRICT OF ARREST
UNITED Sthres MARSHAL OR ANY OTHER AUTHORIZED OFFICER CITY ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to arrest the above-named person and bring that person before the United States Court to answer to the chargefs) listed below. ot ‘
DESCRIPTION OF CHARGES
mo Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering
IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES CODE TITLE SECTION
| 18 1956
py Debra Judge SIGNATURE (FEDERAL JUDGH/U.S, MAGISTRATE) DATE ORDERED United Siztes Magis ee □□ {i273 JAN 14 20 _ | RETURN ° | This warrant ‘was received and executed with the arrest of the above-named person.
RECEIVED NAME AND TITLE OF ARRESTING OFFICER SIGNATURE OF ARRESTING OFFICER
EXECUTED
Note: The arresting officer is directed to serve the attached copy of the charge on the defendant at the time this warrant is executed,
—— ol aAce ne oe G0 VURD Ne 5 □□ a TE Sete , □□□ □□□ NS Sam 9/g/eors: b/T = 3 . Faoshao Garzn . Pte Shaner | 4 || Ana oo RT OU fnew Shse. Fea gle | Area en oo Gud? ™_ □□ □ ote. Pade Mactaez —- My | □ □ (b € Sracho af) ™ ASO wa ‘ . □ ! | (fe. ts Ge cael: foe (2et formes Te it 1 ble The of vemol trotted be. Ecreor By Be □□□□□ oP lity” Useof CC AAR dot gus Above. Lape □ BB fee Lao. t Craven clo Kgasel useel Cire xe “7 (es toda Somat res Se. ofhire fMa+ Frosh [bho on cere TO fer wn, ore Btattslicl pial □ es Leogelel (Fall Castiansrn 2 . Be fone Packie — ——stlban tage. > Ban Uh : □□ elle fo (Bon Bors ? | □□ Vos Te. Orne 5 vt Careots Ty ee a lalla oo im, Ed AEE BUI A BRIS Oe goo 698 Sola
——||-Lel fig fe, tns. 9 check fron Boag "Ets wile ont Ug ee npn es EOE. anced fre ba ble Ls vo leno Viks Glan of ALL Ee
eee □ Kee | ie Honth. | Cee i 4 Coy . : — TE. Scey LE ak o Penct or Hos fe L Lelod! □ A 7 3 bats Syiot te Ag i □ 4 rnityp hh eu A oft ir otllrrs fons ok, □ babs Ahi rhowxs rc ES hie MTT rraliey | (BAT ee anumtbimenh eerneg
La | Mae (Grow TG Fen n/n — Mb Ay MGrictp ealti'que2 © pea rie Saljceeds = Yes | a . □ —~ She Si, 5 FEr{Emes Lom £ Sas from Gaeta □□□□ — See Las ose ot Fe Ces toes +s. | Mens peictra — i/o Retin Feclem ~~ My Loree ppee 4 ote ~ LE lar Coes cof Ly sSee Likesbeeg ane i . a peg TR or de, ‘ Le betie Sef Ce Frof CG Fevsis Ue clipe ol Te. Stoney. anet cori fe ft Loaw oA □□ S308 Ped | LF erowld fell Con fretr ty tho fons Koy | L Laden Cartan 7orams Ch blood Klee A □□ Lio . d 4 iS _ fetal Gray Coy Cy yy Oey □□ ~ Could py db a aAiftean? Marre. v □ __| Re Tse SS eS Tes Jesse. Leas Ly frcheas Prevce try Put 5b rb? Fa Salel Ayn, Ze {far Ee must Prete. altos.
— st Latent eee eens git + Aaya tao
| □□ Excovencluod Jee Gas Contes fy lp | Push = Letold hin FE esoulel 8 we hin bolle shyinee □ Pe, Cisse, Css = [Ba SSE rae os wolected 22. AOE. TAC ? □ - Zanes aa Sy years age at Mol, ——- Cadtvan fecerevoled : □ moe Centoras a Merce” Rarer Bn t [? fotos Loar Vase Keel Ver GaP 2 But Sis At 4 ty A\ □
| Lid Ty Sie ask pon ROE re Tlic _ast_yo ~ Lat Cohn po a _ eA Ver □□□□□ Ae put ty ash” fllono Yarso Lhifror ——-———-H ce — _— a Pitta lel Fess alel cdf Gah ~~ ft - □□ Fy | □ _ Tt
ee fando P — At, ee - 27 Pecks, □□ :
Vel cle Bey — | Cc ne fon acl. Pian, ore (fo Aas ¢ “ade ep fon Cosmas Spee 6 LT ' oe re ft yes ee □□□ □□ — i wi hin fl 6B _ 0 □□□□ 9 nt cee ee —
yt ee ee ae eb
Al 5 ‘ Ge. nant Execs, Jf 7] Ut Ley 4 Ak □□ □□□ 74 74 - □□ | Never Soe As, Longanc. fren Ce Lecsiilles [Pepe Pees | Ley is Ltat was on Se Payers! ‘Le Vow Know Tp ih el eg Oe thet Hg eset age eat As bike □□ E lection eit. Peak Fea BS Ite fawes 9 OTB □□ tilly, Legume Le _ et I tenth Lien Mec baaee de Ce □□ [SE OO ae A Hijet (ash lose Poon, 2229 be □□□ □ eke ae ee a Vay Enos bly Patterm dE yuan Fee | ot TE yh Fer NCS 4 43 LL Chere obi □□□□ □ OE □□□□□□ pe He tna lafeara. howe ee □ pe =e —____Fecke bilascs — kes MA éver- eof hong Mamer- — Ales | □ Lo ee — 7 + — __ . ahd ee Sk Bln LE Tey |} Bore > FBwonn DO a
mo □□□□ □ | ‘ib i oe 7) ¢ for acfan mee gs. | ~ Merchant at tol af Bor Cleahine Fs □□ he, | Ay Ge Bos At, Mit 4 ee v oh
[7] __ ——_____ Lbeod os SF Ce 7 Fee atanta we owe Ra ches —LbF 6 se Cuff □□ I} BESS SOGS ~Raks we i nares CF ao eye. thee oe LO ere a Pimetcyet fag ee at Klaeres Anof ble | Jos. Teses Car, Awol Cafe ay = Asal Se A oS . - = a a oe yee LAtO Lye. Se Lbree iA Se . latce Cl i ~ Ce arm F ge jhe peter casice. Ll (Frerlre 400~3e5 wey □□ ce — "FP. Bekeve. ro hea 5 Ads we HMareno’ La shedons □ ff Fa Coy Pha fs Di sen b : has Hat.t2,. by act C wha Lonevaegly : Ga ef late acs fey tg & Ae ao Bans SS AG SOR (ete We C, hers Craver ole Bass om Bey fen, tls f on waren bee’ fh he ask ate £ AN eve Be crf Ee 4 Li : An i gale rhe —agencpsct Faurhe Le hy Ca lee nes oo = Mau £, | Cahalorg A Soere ben A la ete
ee De
. . | ~ os tet. : Ady se oe Bosieess | TE of at Ley ha of 4 Hes cca Lace. □ = . | fe fuse stalks abut Plea ney Coopehapar □ .
: : ! □ oe I ee oe po ——-—______}f, ee oo | a oe 1 ce Oo oo od, oe __ | a | □ ce to oe □
a : ——-— □
I | fo □□ □□
i aATIR HUSDC ary OTe UNITED STATES DISTRICT: COURT | | USDC SDNY SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ferent - - -_ = - - = = sm oF oF som XK ELRo + f CTRONICALLY FILED
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
“TE RILED « OP Sart vo - orppR | ED “Fil FAUSTINO GARZA-GONZALEZ, 53 12 cr. 102 (LAK} a/k/a “Fausto,” : Defendant. , S LABS T — Cy : 2 ae ™ = eos Se es ee he Ue ou wl x . Foon WHEREAS , with.defendant Faustino Garza-IGonzalez'a habe Loe ute 4 □ consent, his guilty plea allocution was taken beflore the Honorable James L. Cott, ‘United, states Magistrate Judge, on September 8, 2011; : WHEREAS, a Eranseript of the allocution was made and thereafter was transmitted to. the District Court; and WHEREAS, upon review of that transcript, this Court has determined that Garza- Gonzalez entered the quilty plea knowingly maby ee □□ and voluntarily, and that there wag a factual basis for Che quilty plea; pate ge TT IS HEREBY, ORDERED that Ovalies’as guilty plea is accepted. □□ . Dated: New York, Ne York. ae september HBP 2011 by. ve Baby. HON, LEWIS Ad KXPI wi) @"h'Undeed States District Judge Southern District of New York ey ih
Prue fo a (4 Al Dara | Decewonn Case Monsees [oiled No 42h Dect Numecel S2) □□□□ 2-0 | erent Come, = he OteenseCrneaen 12 SFO) Sentence fhocepus = B59 PLEA □□□□□□ of Opens = %¢fzel Cam Nuno 2 S2-i- Ce Ofo2- et [eAK] Datte.of Oerewne Soedgem ent LYLE ence Caegection Oe Seu tenes. Fie Crseicac Mistare.feph □□□ DecenornT Was Fron Cometr On = Counts 22) □□□□ i ge Per Cowman Tustics Infrnehen Stvvices “Divisow Fane 24.30 ———____ ello=176 LONE Zel2a sf oooaon [heh
TEN 8 86692799
| ee __holentofr zd Your Ten Pint Submission which. enter □□□□□□□ following “Tres phos»
|,
i □□□ |
7 le . oN 53PM P 4 MARSHALS page HED, 112126376132 b, 1? tof't9 eo 1S “iF OF . ws a . 7 b age tift-or-Ou1G2LAK Ddoument90. -Filed;02/08/12""Page "P'.! ewullT ot Aeterna So Melt BC UNITED STATES BISTRIGP COURT: ntmRN Disitlorof” NEW YORR. UNEFEDSTA TES OF AMERICA.“ ™ ‘fe a wae “AMENDED TUDGMENT TN A.CREMANAL CASE.” . . 1. Vv, © 2 . ay □ . . 7 ty . ‘ | CIS Soe Gage Nunabors 7" LeSZ) □□□ H2-OUGARY UIKRAM DATTA 0 50000 Cee SUSM Number 645420840 Date-cOreidal Ind ginemty “2/7/12 - ee Didrimn ite -“Bsq, (212) 861-9850 we {OrDate of LastAmended Judguiemty 2, veh” □ a Defendials Atomay, 727 77 a . . Regsonfor Amendments: ee ret 8 ewe □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ Remend (18 Us5.Q: 3742CHCH) end (2)) 5, +, + Ed □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ Coviditions (18 U.S.C; $6. 35830) or 3583(0)} twdluction of Sentasee for Cheged Circumstances (Red. R. Crist. ~ El Btedificesion af yayg{edtensd SF Lagrteonmment for-Exintordinary and P35) OO as ee Chagdiling Rewars USC. FSBO Ls Cariutlon of Seotence by Sentencing. Court (Fell, RL-CpersacP, 34¢q)} =+9E] -Moditieniloe- of imposed tier of linprlsortivent far Retrosgtive Amendment) Conpition a Seatyace Yor Wlezitat Mlytate (Perk -Ciriss □□□ 36) ots to the Septenelng-Guigeliner FUSE. FIELD ed . □□□ A Dede Minton bid Court-Purrvent CT UUs F235 or . Tee ET III TL. mo eT 7D) Mariticelnaor tesiliveinn Order (18 8.8.0. § A004), woo THEDEEENDANT; | a □□ pleaddd guiltyto count(e) ( pleaded noto eomtenderg'tp oauptis} ee which wes accepted by.the court. □□□ ae □□ found gulkty'on count’ss " (S2) Reo & (82) Thres ot a Bfter & plea ofnot guilty. oes we Tete erat eee eta a TT □ “the stefendent Ip adjudiedted puitty af-thosg offenses: whe rope Te el ve ‘ . Beeson.” “Ngturstor Offense os Ofte edad’ + + “Sigurt 1956() Gonspiray-4o Corti Money Latiiderigg <i. □ WUSEAT Gonspirgeyita Trayel Internationally Wh AbtorRackstenring °° AEE + (82) Thee □
Ss cnsPye-defendant ts septeriged ax piovided:in, Hanes 2 ~~ eg of tals jodgment,, The-senictice Je itaposcd pli’sunnt-to the Senténclng Reform Act of 984, 0 ee UT OL tee OT ee v The defendant har beer-acthultted of counl (S2\One-by-the 120201 Onder, ee ee oe Cosine All Open” =" ts are dtemisted.on teeinciton ofthe Uited aumy,, . Le It lpurdoyed thut the de adant ustnott United. talon ee deel a. + anata Pe ingaarettnt lg eta Coch and gel camctetsoonGiy Gietamatametliygel Hele papccala, the detendoar mustnotify the court nnd United States dtthimey- of rantertal elianges in Abonodtig,einpury starices, eee Pee hee ee daa 98, □□ ga a changes fo the PAZ can be forid'od.the Hiprisonnpend Tata oF tansailshk Tataraent Ee □□ ey, □□ a RE as : ‘ . . ‘ et un out “ Peete vem ia “4 ft we .
oo DOC Te f Hf A oo. ee . wa ve □□ LONTGCALEY BEET . Notas . * aa ne ee - [Doc 0 SP pence ee Ea [PATE FILED: 27h ft : ree . . os me : .
□ i . . i se — -
! fo + , . . ~ :SaPM P 2 Asus ™~ RAK Ny 142126376132 9 ia oot — ° ‘nous dar Maeaktdtuana WzehKeDacumient :Flled 02/08 age 2 OLIN. a NOMS Gee Waadthe mae Dah tow ta, GUO: Meng: Changes wal □□□□□□□□□ □□□□ SS gg ge va Daigo > BO 6. □ DEFENDANT. '::-sWOGRANCUATTA: oo ON cooghre CASE NUMBER; .1:09-CR-949.02(LAK) Te ee co tapisistinmayge The defendant is hateby cammitted-to the oustody-of the Untted Stile ‘Birredyof Prisans.to-be imprisoned for a folie 5 JUDE dee OU a 235 Months on (S2)Dwo and:60 Months on (82)Three, the terms to run coneurrently.t.. 2”
oourt makes the following recomruéndatibis inthe Butea of Prisonst-!3> □□ tS . That consistent with the:palidley.of the Burogy of Prisoina: (1) the defendant be desigated to a fachlity-es abpae fo Laredo, TX:as possible?) he be'gonsidgrett-for- participation: inthe. RD programs -(3) ie be: evaluated anid; ttinecesnary, tr for lis-héaringimpalrment*® .. Pe, □□ “The:deferdaritiis remajtedtto she gustody ofthe United Siete Matshak Cl. The defendant shall surrorider to the United States Marshal-forthis dlstefats,. toe □ ate —_—_— “oe o Pane on To on “ Cl usnolffed-by the United-StatesMamihal, 050 ET rene ne a :~The-defigdayt shall surrender for serviog oF-sentente-ab theraitiitlon dusteibtad’by. the Hureau of Pricans: □□ □
‘ Cl axotifivd by. the United Statos.thishal. - ees “ees vie □□ sons □□ C1 .esnotified by the Brobition- or Pretrial Sarvicas-Offles, °° bo SE,
Thave vxcoutd tts jadgmentinssfolloiet .'coec eeleeenes ee CT POP ee
renee _ (>. 24, 26}: vet Peg Kask& □□ xterm, [iin no) Mo, i, le,
Sm Soe A a TUNFTRD STARESHARSHAL a EE ogy 379. carte be 7 soe - titted lente Ee pe EE aad. 2th DEPUTYONITED STATES MAISHAL
02-03-2014 VWMPULATION ~~-= 129
AS OF 092.9
REGNO. , ; 64542-054 NAME; DATTA, VIKRAM INO. .......: 474001xA1 DATE OF BIRTH: 10-26-1969 AGE: 53 esses eee... BAS/A-DRS . ete eeeee t CROCKETY QUARTERS.....: cog-6o1r PEPATNERS NO NOTIFICATIONS: No HOME DETENTION ELIGIBILITY DATE; 08-05-2927
THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE DATA IS FOR THE INMATEIS CURRENT COMMITMENT.
THE INMATE Tg PROUECYED FOR RELWASH: 02-05-2028 VIA Gc?T REL | ooeccennccece JUDGMENT/WARRANT NO: 019 Wt COURT OF JURISDICTION. .......,..; NEW YORK, SOUTHERN pDistTRcrp NUMBER... TT) 4+ (82) 11-CR-0102-02 ( ee iiiiris KAPLAN DATE SENTENCED/PROBATION IMPOSED: 01-20-2019
DATE COMMITTED... NT OORDS 02-29-2012
HOW SPMMETTED. «eee... US DISTRICT couRT COMMITMENT PROBATION IMPosep.... 01) 17711773 No | FELONY ASSESS MYspMuR ASSESS FINES cosrs NON-CCMMET TED, : $200.00 $00.00 $00.00 $00.00 RESTITUTION, eat PROPERTY; No SERVICES; No AMOUNT : $00.00 Lirit tree ---+ CURRENT OBLIGATION NO: 919 □□ OFFENSE CODE....; saa OFF/CHG: 18:1956 (4) CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MONEY LAUNDERING | 18:372 Consp To TRAVEL INTERNATIONALLY IN AtD OF RACKETEERING
SENTENCE PROCEDURE...... 000000 3559 PLRA SENTENCE
SENTENCE IMPOSED/TIME To SERVE.: 235 MONTHS
TERM OF SUPERVISION...,........, 3 YEARS
DATE OF OFFENSE... 6. 01-31-2021,
{ | = MORE PAGES To FOLLOW , | ZA BIT - 7
os x □□□ □ . ne eae □□ U.S Department of Justice Certification of Identity a Ree □□ . ot □ □□ “aah □□□□□□□
FORM APPROVED OMBNO. 1103-0016
EXPIRES 05/3 1/2023
[eile Privacy Act Statement. In accordance with 28 CFR Section 16.4L(d) personal data sufficient to identify the individuals submitting requests by mail under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C, Section 552a, is required. The purpose of this solicitation is to ensure thal the records of individuals who are the subject of U.S. Department of Justice systems of records are not wrongfilly disclosed by the Department. Requests will not be processed if this information is not finished, False information on this form may subject the requester to criminal penalties under 18 U.S.C. 1001 und/or 5 U.S.C. Section 552a((3). Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.50 hours per response, inchiding the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Suggestions for reducing this burden may be submitted fo the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Public Use Reports Project (1103-0016), Washington, DC 20503.
_ Full Name of Requester ! V iKAAM - “D ATTA Citizenship Status ? Us Cy TIZE WN’ Social Security Number 7_ 4 Z| - 39-84 7 □ Current Address /5™| 2 LEILA “Dave. Lars D¢, lz 704] Date of Birth lo/ 22 | \f#éo Piace of Birth A matsag, LaDy A: OPTIONAL: Authorization to Release Information to Another Person This form is also to be completed by a requester who is authorizing information relating to himself or herself fo be yeleased to another person, Further, pursuant to 5 U.S.C, Section 552a(b), I authorize the US. Department of Justice to release any and all information relating to me to:
Print or Type Name I declave under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and comect, and that ] am the person named above, and I understand that any falsification of this statement is punishable under the provisions of 18 U.S.C, Section 1001 by a fine of not more than $10,000 or by imprisonment of not more than five years or both, and that requesting or obtaining any record(s) under false pretenses is punishable under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 352a(3(3) by a fine of not more than $5,000. Signature 4 \ - Dal, Date ‘1/257 24
ee of individual who is the subject of the record(s} sought, * Individual submitting a request under the Privacy Act of 1974 must be either “a citizen of the United States ov an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence,” pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 552a(a)(2), Requests will be processed as Freedom of Information Act requests pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 552 , rather than Privacy Act requests, for individuals who are not United States citizens or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, * Droviding your social security number is voluntary. You are asked to provide your social security number only to facilitate the identification of records relating to you, Without your social security number, the Department may be unable to locate any or all records pertaining to you. ‘Signature of individual who is the subject of the record sought. re en et FORM DOL36!
O08 a © se □□ toh ope: ae Zz □□ . Vy Lae □□□ □□ == SS. me ee ee □ D — OD SERS : □□ i = PRES Le . ~~ ols □□ | ee a <= MSMes ve □□ DS See | —— rl YY OES | == 2 ORNS . Te ———v gt . □□□ . □ □ ——- . Q □ w ENS □ i= 3 8 = DAS” . ee —— g ih SSS, —— tm — ESS □ . = a 2 SESE os □ == > So |S | un EG 3 BES □ ie = — Oe, = 7 . teat, Toeng Sor : □ OR □ = OO ayes ‘ □□ | ™ : ay — ©} = ay nny] O □□
Ye SP □ A — . . .
2 nN