Harrisburg Man Charged with Heroin Distribution and Possession of a Weapon in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime
HARRISBURG—The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced today that a federal Grand Jury in Harrisburg has returned an indictment charging Peter Fragoso, age 18, with distribution of heroin and the possession of a weapon in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Fragoso, a resident of Dauphin County, is also charged with possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number.
According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, Fragoso was arrested while allegedly participating in a drug trafficking transaction in Harrisburg in June 2015.
This matter was investigated by the Pennsylvania State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Prosecution has been assigned to Assistant U.S. Attorney Chelsea Schinnour.
This case was brought as part of the Violent Crime Reduction Partnership (“VCRP”), a district wide initiative to combat the spread of violent crime in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Led by the United States Attorney’s Office, the VCRP consists of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies whose mission is to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who commit violent crimes.
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 is life 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.