Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-CA  5:19-cr-00035
Case Name:   USA v. Herrera et al
  Press Releases:
San Francisco - Jorge Jasso, 26, a Norteño street gang member, was arrested in Fresno, California on November 29, 2018 following his disappearance on October 22, 2018, announced United States Attorney Alex G. Tse and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent in Charge John F. Bennett.  A federal grand jury indicted Jasso on September 27, 2018 along with fourteen other gang members for a broad range of racketeering crimes, including racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit murder and assault in aid of racketeering, attempted murder in aid of racketeering, and assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering.  Jasso was scheduled to appear in magistrate court in San Jose for a bail review hearing on October 22, 2018, the day he disappeared.  His girlfriend, Kimberly Herrera Villacorte, called 911 that morning to report that unknown individuals had burst into Jasso’s residence, dragged her into a closet by the hair, and kidnapped him.  The ankle monitor that had been placed on Jasso was found on the ground next to the residence.  U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi issued a bench warrant against Jasso for failing to appear before the Court on that date, as required.

Suspecting that this might be a hoax given a number of inconsistencies in Herrera’s account of the events, the FBI and local law enforcement agencies surveilled Herrera for almost six weeks, which eventually led them to Jasso.  On November 29, 2018, Jasso and Herrera were in a Motel 6 in Fresno, California, and were seen entering a white GMC truck.  When police tried to pull it over, the truck tried to escape and crashed into another vehicle.  After the collision, Jasso jumped out of the truck and attempted to run from the police.  After a short chase, Jasso was taken into custody and was found to be in possession of a concealed firearm.  Jasso was arrested along with the other occupants of the vehicle, including Villacorte.  

This morning, the United States Attorney’s Office filed a criminal complaint against Herrera, 22, charging her with making false statements to government agents, in violation of Title 18, United States Code 1001(a) and aiding and abetting failure to appear, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3146(a)(1) and 2.  If convicted, Herrera faces up to five years in prison for lying to the FBI and up to ten years in prison for assisting Jasso in jumping bail, however, the Complaint filed today merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  In addition, any sentence following a conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.  

Last week’s arrest and efforts to locate Jasso are the product of a coordinated effort by the FBI, the California Highway Patrol, the Soledad Police Department, the Salinas Police Department, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Multi-Agency Gang Enforcement Consortium, and the Fresno Police Department.

 

SAN JOSE- A federal grand jury indicted multiple Salinas-based gang members for a broad range of racketeering crimes, including racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit murder and assault in aid of racketeering, attempted murder in aid of racketeering, and assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering, announced United States Attorney Alex G. Tse and Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent in Charge John F. Bennett.  The indictment handed down on October 3, 2013, and unsealed today alleges that the defendants are all gang members who committed crimes in and out of Monterey County Jail for the benefit of enhancing the wealth and reputation of the gang and themselves.  

“As alleged, the Nuestra Familia prison gang and the Norteño street gangs have terrorized Monterey County residents for much too long,” said U.S. Attorney Tse.  “The gangs have targeted anyone, even in jail, who does not obey their violent rules.  We are thankful for the efforts of our federal and local partners to bring to justice individuals responsible for these alleged horrific criminal acts within our prison system.”

“In collaboration with our partners at the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office and the Monterey County Jail, we will continue to take action against groups who use violence, fear, and criminal behavior for their own power and gain,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge, John F. Bennett. “It is important for Monterey County and Salinas area residents to know that the FBI will not tolerate the presence of organized criminal enterprises in our neighborhoods.  We will not allow fear or intimidation have a place in our communities.”

“This was an exhaustive and thorough 6-year effort by the FBI,” said Monterey Sheriff Steve Bernal, “We are proud to have partnered with our federal partners on this important investigation that will improve the safety of our entire community.”  

According to the indictment, the defendants engaged in racketeering for the purpose of preserving the power, territory, reputation, and profits of the Nuestra Familia/Salinas Norteños Enterprise.  The indictment describes how members, when not incarcerated, compete for control of lucrative illegal activities, such as drug dealing and robbery.  Such competition leads to violence both on the streets and within custodial facilities.  The indictment also describes how the gang developed a structure, philosophy, rules, rituals, and obligations for its members within custodial facilities in Monterey County.  One rule includes the general principle that once an individual reaches a certain status within the gang, death, under most circumstances, is the only way to withdraw.   

Nuestra Familia sees Monterey County as a stronghold for the gang.  The indictment describes how the gang has targeted Monterey County for crimes, most specifically in and near Salinas.  For example, Norteño cliques in the county fight with rival street gangs, and to a lesser extent other Norteño cliques, for control of territory in which to conduct narcotics trafficking and other crimes, as well as to recruit and influence non-gang members.  

Inside the Monterey County Jail, Norteños work together to maintain the structure and follow the rules of Nuestra Familia without regard to what specific clique they are from.  Nuestra Familia has come to regard inmates at Monterey County Jail as potential new members for the criminal organization.  Norteños in Monterey County Jail are separated from other inmates—in part due to the Norteños predatory nature, and in part because Nuestra Familia rules prohibit them from preying upon each other—and Nuestra Familia now regards the jail as one of the better “training” facilities for new members.  The gang considers inmates in the jail well-regimented, disciplined, and aligned with Nuestra Familia values.  

In this case, the defendants have been charged with either directing or participating in assaults, attempted murders, and drug trafficking within Monterey County Jail as follows:

 

Johnny Magdaleno, a/k/a “Soldier Boy,”

Vincent Gerald Garcia, a/k/a “Chente,”

Rodney Luis Romero, a/k/a “Speedy,”

Michael James Rice, a/k/a “Redwood,”

Alberto Cervantes, a/k/a “Littles”

Alejo Alex Alegre, IV, a/k/a “Chino,”

Carlos Cervantes, a/k/a “Lil Huero,” a/k/a “Doug,”

Alberto Moreno, a/k/a “Doughboy,”

Steven Anthony Dorado, a/k/a “Castro,” a/k/a “Chinaman,”

Michael Abraham Cazares, a/k/a “Lil Rhino,”

Jeffrey Lopez, a/k/a “T-Bone,”

Juan Alvarez, a/k/a “Chucky,”

Erik Lopez, a/k/a “Bimbo,” and

Jorge Jasso

 

The indictment describes the crimes in which each defendant has participated, leadership positions within the gang, and a description of the defendants’ gang-related tattoos.  The indictment centers largely on seven “removals,” by which inmates inflict violence on other inmates, often for violations of gang rules. The purpose of a removal is often to literally remove an inmate from a prison housing unit by killing that inmate or inflicting as much bodily harm as possible.  Removals typically require authorization from gang leadership and members are instructed how to perpetrate the violent crime—members are instructed how and where a “hitter” should stab a victim in order to inflict as much injury as possible, and how “bombers” should follow up by assaulting the victim with hands and feet to inflict additional injuries and to distract prison guards long enough to allow a bomber to discard weapons and change out of blood-stained clothes.  

In this case, the following removals are alleged:

(1)       Removal of Victim 1 on December 2, 2012 (Victim 1 was stabbed at least 21 times in the chest and back with a jail-made shank for violating gang rules):  



Johnny “Soldier Boy” Magdaleno 

Erik “Bimbo” Lopez 

Jorge Jasso

Alberto “Littles” Cervantes 



(2)       Removal of Victim 2 on February 25, 2013 (Victim 2 was stabbed in the head and face):    



 Rodney “Speedy” Romero 

Alberto “Littles” Cervantes

 Johnny “Soldier Boy” Magdaleno 

Erik “Bimbo” Lopez 

Jorge Jasso

Michael “Redwood” Rice



(3)       Removal of Victim 3 on April 29, 2013 (Victim 3 was stabbed in the head, hands, arms, and wrists):  



 Johnny “Soldier Boy” Magdaleno 

Vincent “Chente” Garcia 

Rodney “Speedy” Romero 

Michael “Redwood” Rice

Carlos “Doug/Huero” Cervantes 

Alberto “Doughboy” Moreno 

Steven “Castro/Chinaman” Dorado

Jorge Jasso 



(4)       Removal of Victim 4 on July 10, 2013 (Victim 4 was stabbed in the face, head, and neck):  



Michael “Little Rhino” Cazares 

Jeffrey “T-Bone” Lopez 



(5)       Removal of Victim 5 on October 23, 2013 (Victim 5 was stabbed in the neck):  



Vincent “Chente” Garcia 

Rodney “Speedy” Romero 

Juan “Chucky” Alvarez



(6)       Removal of Victim 6 on November 13, 2013 (Victim 6 was stabbed in the head, torso, and arms approximately 10 times):  



Alejo “Chino” Alegre 



(7)       Removal of Victim 7 on April 14, 2014:  



Vincent “Chente” Garcia



In sum, the charges pending against each defendant are as follows:

 



Defendant





Age





Charges





Maximum Statutory Penalty





All Defendants

 





 





Racketeering Conspiracy

18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)





Life in prison

5 years of supervised release

$250,000 fine





JOHNNY MAGDALENO





31





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





VINCENT GERALD GARCIA





51





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





Attempted Murder (of Victim 5) in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Assault (of Victim 5) With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





20 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Attempted Murder (of Victim 7) in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Assault (of Victim 7) With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(3)





20 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





RODNEY LUIS ROMERO

 





33





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





Attempted Murder (of Victim 5) in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Assault (of Victim 5) With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





20 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





MICHAEL JAMES RICE





34





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





ALBERTO CERVANTES





34





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)

 

 

 

 





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





ALEJO ALEX ALEGRE, IV





26





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





Attempted Murder (of Victim 6) in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Assault (of Victim 6) With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(3)





20 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





CARLOS CERVANTES





30





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





ALBERTO MORENO





25





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





STEVEN ANTHONY DORADO





27

 





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





MICHAEL ABRAHAM CAZARES





26





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





JEFFREY LOPEZ





26





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





JUAN ALVAREZ





37





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





Attempted Murder (of Victim 5) in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Assault (of Victim 5) With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(3)





20 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





ERIK LOPEZ





24





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine





Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





JORGE JASSO

 





26





Conspiracy to Commit Murder in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)





10 years in prison

3 years supervised release

$250,000 fine





Conspiracy to Commit Assault With a Dangerous Weapon in Aid of Racketeering

18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(6)





3 years in prison

1 year supervised release

$250,000 fine



 

An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  

In addition, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.  

The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI with assistance from the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office, the California Highway Patrol, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and the Salinas Police Department.  

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nm0EpppW5aUspm3OSxg5CZ4gZUdYENN4id_0pRoey-o
  Last Updated: 2024-04-12 15:51:51 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   ND-CA  5:18-mj-01714
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E