United States District Court, D. Maryland
J. MESSITTE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Parry, pro se, has filed a Motion for Sentence Reduction
And/Or Modification Pursuant to the Provisions of 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582 and/or 18 U.S.C. § 2255. ECF No. 29. For the
reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
September 4, 2014, the Government filed an Information
charging Parry with one count of wire fraud in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 1343, and one count of money laundering in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957, alleging that Parry used
his position as an executive of the American Registry of
Pathology (“ARP”) to defraud ARP out of money
intended for medical studies. ECF No. 1. On September 17,
2015, Parry pled guilty to both Counts, and on January 29,
2016, this Court sentenced him to 48 months imprisonment on
each count, to be served concurrently. ECF No. 21.
factual predicate was this:
In January 1998, Parry was hired by ARP as its Director of
Operations. ECF No. 7. In January 2014, he was promoted to
Executive Director, a role he had been acting in since
October 2011. Id. As Director of Operations and
Executive Director, Parry had authority to direct payment to
ARP's vendors from ARP's accounts, including an
account at Bank of America. Id.
International Registry of Pathology (“IRP”) was
incorporated as a Maryland nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization
in 2003, its purpose being to promote the study of pathology.
Id. Dr. William Gardner served as the President and
Parry served as Treasurer. Id. After Dr.
Gardner's death in October 2011, Parry had sole control
over the IRP bank account. Id.
sometime in early 2010 until early 2014, Parry devised a
scheme to defraud ARP by directing payments from ARP to IRP
under the guise of research grants. Id. He
fabricated documents, including doctored invoices and
e-mails, to justify the payments from ARP to IRP in the event
he was challenged by APR's auditors. Id. Once
the money was transferred to IRP's account, Parry
transferred it to his own personal account. Id. In
total, Parry transferred approximately $2.1 million dollars
to himself by way of the IPR account. Id.
Parry's actions were discovered, Parry himself brought
them to the attention of ARP's auditor and his employer
and assisted ARP and the Government in calculating the
damages caused by his actions. ECF No. 13. Prior to
sentencing, Parry also paid ARP the entire amount of
restitution owed under the plea agreement ($2, 199, 504.09)
plus an addition amount ($31, 962.51), bringing the total
restitution payment to $2, 231, 466.60. Id.
presentence report calculated Parry's Total Offense Level
as 24 under the Sentencing Guidelines, based on an Adjusted
Offense Level of 27 and a three-level downward departure for
acceptance of responsibility. ECF No. 13. The Government
disagreed with Probation's calculation, and argued that
an extra point should be added to Parry's Adjusted
Offense Level pursuant to U.S.S.G. §
2S1.1(b)(2)(A)(“Laundering of Monetary Instruments;
Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from
Unlawful Activity”), which would result in a Total
Offense Level of 25. ECF No. 15. The Court agreed with the
Government, and established Parry's final Total Offense
Level at 25, which, with a Criminal History Category of I,
resulted in a guidelines range of 57-71 months of
imprisonment. ECF No. 22.
sentencing, Parry's counsel argued that Parry should be
sentenced to probation in recognition of his acceptance of
responsibility, his repayment of the restitution, and his
cooperation with the Government and ARP during the
investigation. ECF No. 28. Counsel also presented evidence
that both Parry and his wife suffered from mental conditions
that would be aggravated by his long-term imprisonment.
Id. Taking into account all the arguments made by
counsel, the Court rejected Parry's request for straight
probation, but agreed to a sentence 9 months below the bottom
of the guidelines, i.e. 48 months imprisonment on each of the
two counts, to be served concurrently, followed by two years
of supervised release. ECF No. 21.
January 31, 2017, Parry filed the present Motion for Sentence
Reduction and/or Modification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
3582 and 18 U.S.C. § 2255. ECF No. 29. He argues that he
is entitled to have his sentenced reduced or his conviction
vacated on the grounds that his counsel was ineffective
during the sentencing hearing. Id.
February 6, 2017, the Court directed Parry to supplement his
Motion by completing a form to assist him in organizing his
claims. ECF No. 30. On March 30, 2017, Parry filed a
supplemental Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct
Sentence, consistent with the Court's instructions. ECF
No. 31. On June 6, 2017, the Government filed its Opposition,
and on July 5, 2017, Parry filed a Reply. ECF No. 37.