Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 10-13-2019
Case Style:
United States of America v. Phillip Finn
Case Number: 3:17-cr-00207-JMM
Judge: James M. Munley
Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Lackawanna County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Jenny P. Roberts
Defendant's Attorney:
Call 888-354-4529 if you need help finding a stalking criminal defense lawyer in Scranton, Pennsylvania
Description:
Scranton, PA - Plains Township Man Pleads Guilty To Firebombing Luzerne County Children And Youth
Philip Finn, Jr., age 49, of Plains, Pennsylvania, pleaded guilty to use of fire to commit stalking.
According to United States Attorney David J. Freed, Finn admitted that on March 6, 2017, he used three Molotov cocktails to set fire to the Luzerne County Children and Youth Building to harass and intimidate two Children and Youth Employees.
On July 11, 2017, Finn was indicted on charges of stalking, interstate communications and malicious damage to federal property by fire. The indictment alleged that between March 3, 2017 and March 6, 2017, Finn used Facebook, Google and his cell phone to harass and intimidate two Luzerne County Children and Youth Services employees. On October 2, 2018, an additional count of Interstate Communications and the charge of use of fire to commit a felony were filed against Finn. On May 14, 2019, a federal grand jury returned a second superseding indictment charging Finn with attempted witness tampering.
The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Wilkes-Barre City Police Department, and the Luzerne County District Attorney’s Office. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenny P. Roberts is prosecuting the case.
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.
Finn faces a mandatory 10 years' imprisonment. 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.
Outcome: Defendant pleaded guilty.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: