All Case Results

United States v. H.A.P.

Charge: Aggravated Identity Theft, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1)
United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
April 2026
federal
Worst Case Scenario:
A federal felony conviction, a mandatory prison sentence, additional exposure from the more serious immigration fraud count, financial penalties, and removal to Jamaica despite the client's role as the father of a five-year-old daughter in South Florida.
Actual Results:
24-Month Mandatory Minimum | Fine Waived | Special Visa Obtained, Client Remains in U.S. The Court recommended Bureau of Prisons designation close to South Florida for family contact.

Arrested For:

Aggravated Identity Theft in violation of federal law. The client, a 57-year-old Jamaican national with no prior criminal history, was charged in connection with a single visit to a Florida DMV office in 2020, where he used another person's identifying information to obtain a driver's license. No financial fraud was alleged. The victim suffered no monetary loss and was unaware his identity had been used until law enforcement contacted him years later.

What Was Done:

AMC Defense Law negotiated a plea agreement that dismissed the more serious immigration fraud count. Counsel filed a detailed sentencing memorandum and presented oral argument at sentencing before the Honorable Kathleen M. Williams in the Southern District of Florida, arguing that the mandatory minimum of 24 months was the only sentence the statute permitted and that every factor under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) supported that result. Counsel documented the client's clean record, his role as the father of a five-year-old daughter in South Florida, his cooperation with the government, and his zero disciplinary infractions during pretrial detention. Counsel also argued that the client's impending deportation constituted a significant additional punishment beyond incarceration.

Unique Approach:

The defense secured a special visa allowing the client to remain in the United States following his sentence, despite an active ICE detainer that would otherwise have resulted in mandatory removal to Jamaica. Counsel made that immigration consequence central to the sentencing presentation while obtaining dismissal of the more serious immigration fraud count.

Facing similar charges?