Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Parry v. United States

United States District Court, D. Maryland

April 20, 2018




         Michael 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.


         On 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.

         The 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.

         The 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.

         Between 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.

         Before 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.

         The 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.

         At 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.

         On 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.

         On 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.

         II. ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.