Home Philadelphia Press Releases 2014 Luzerne County Woman Pleads Guilty to Tampering with Consumer Product

Luzerne County Woman Pleads Guilty to Tampering with Consumer Product

U.S. Attorney’s Office February 04, 2014
  • Middle District of Pennsylvania (717) 221-4482

The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that a 35-year-old Wilkes-Barre resident pleaded guilty today in Wilkes-Barre before U.S. Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick to a criminal information charging her with tampering with a consumer product that affected interstate commerce.

According to United States Attorney Peter J. Smith, the defendant, Yolanda Holman, of Wilkes-Barre, admitted that she knowingly and intentionally tainted a bottle of non-prescription children’s pain reliever with prescription pills and other medication and caused it to be taken to a retail store in Wilkes-Barre as a returned item on or about August 23, 2013.

U.S. Attorney Smith stated that suspected tainted containers related to this incident were recovered and were in the possession of law enforcement officers or otherwise destroyed. The tainted containers present no danger to the public.

The criminal information and a plea agreement were filed on December 19, 2013.

The investigation was conducted by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation-Scranton Resident Office. Prosecution is assigned to Assistant United States Attorney Michelle Olshefski.

A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is 10 years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. 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.