UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

vs. 

STANLEY LAPLANCHE, 

Defendant. 

---------------�' 

FACTUAL PROFFER 

The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida rthis Office") and 

(hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") agree that the following facts prove beyond a 

reasonable doubt that the defendant committed three separate acts of unlawful delivery of 

ammunition to a common carrier in violation of 18 USC§ 922(e) and 924(a)(l)(D), such that 

1. the Defendant knowingly and willfully delivered OT caused to be delivered a

package or container containing ammunition to a common or contract carrier;

2. that the package or container was intended for transportation in foreign

commerce;

3. that the package OT container was intended to be transported to someone other

than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed

collector; and

4. the Defendant did not provide written notice to the carrier that multiple rounds

of ammunition were being transported or shipped.

On October 18, 2019, West Palm Beach Border Enforcement and Security Task force 

(BEST) inspected a 2004 Suzuki SUV, VIN: JS3TY92V144101342, that was destined to be 

exported to Haiti. The exporter of the vehicle was listed as Stanley LAPLANCHE (DOB: 

06/25/1961 - COC: USA) on shipping manifest Dock Receipt# 179749, when it was provided to 

Monarch shipping in Riviera Beach, Florida in the Southern District of Florida on October 7, 2019. 

During the inspection agents discovered and seized approximately 7,900 rounds of ammunition 

secreted in a freezer discovered within the Suzuki's cargo. In total, agents seized the following 

ammunition from the Suzuki: 9 mm ammunition - 6,700 rounds; .380 auto ammunition - 600 

20-CR-80061-RS

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 1 of 9
rounds; .40 cal. ammunition - 200 rounds; and .38 special ammunition - 400 rounds, from this 

2004 Suzuki. 

BEST members discovered that LAPLANCHE had recently delivered and presented for 

export to Haiti two other vehicles to Haiti and that the two vehicles were still in-route to Haiti. 

BEST members provided Monarch Shipping with a re-delivery notice for the two vehicles and 

LAPLANCHE'S two vehicles were returned to the Port of Palm Beach for inspection. 

On October 29, 2019, BEST members inspected the two additional vehicles that were 

presented for export by LAPLANCHE. The first was a 1999 white Mitsubishi Montero, VIN: 

JA4MR51R2XJ007323. The shipping manifest Dock Receipt # 179553 indicated it was 

delivered to Monarch shipping in Riviera Beach, Florida in the Southern District of Florida on 

September 23, 2019. During the inspection of the 1999 white Mitsubishi, agents discovered and 

seized, secreted in a freezer within the 1999 white Mitsubishi, the following: approximately 8,750 

rounds of 9 mm ammunition; and 1,700 rounds of 12-gauge ammunition. The second vehicle 

delivered for export by LAPLANCHE was a 1997 black Mitsubishi Montero, VIN: 

JA4MR41R9VJ007326. The shipping manifest Dock Receipt# 179483, indicated the 1997 black 

Mitsubishi was provided to Monarch shipping in Riviera Beach, Florida in the Southern District 

of Florida on September 18, 2019. During the inspection, agents discovery and seized, secreted 

in another freezer within the 1997 black Mitsubishi's cargo, the following: 30,850 rounds of9 mm 

ammunition; 1,100 rounds of .40 cal. ammunition; 1,000 rounds of .380 auto ammunition; 800 

rounds of 45 cal. ammunition; and 750 rounds of .38 special ammunition. 

A total of approximately 52,850 rounds of ammunition was seized from LAPLANCHE'S 

three vehicles. A review of all three sets of shipping documents revealed that LAPLANCHE did 

not advise Monarch Shipping, the common carrier, that he was shipping ammunition. 

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 2 of 9
LAPLANCHE consented to an interviewed that occurred in a Walmart parking lot after he 

was advised by agents about the munitions investigation. LAPLANCHE said he received money 

from people in Haiti via Western Union and Money Gram, some of which he used to purchase the 

vehicles and goods and the rest he kept as fees for his services. LAPLANCHE also stated that he 

purchased and exported the vehicles in his own name, and that he had towed the vehicles to the 

port for export. 

Agents showed LAPLANCHE three sets of shipping documents obtained from Monarch 

Shipping, Dock Receipt numbers 1797 49, 179553, and 179483, for the 3 vehicles. LAPLANCH 

acknowledged that he did, in fact, complete the requisite paperwork for the vehicles to be exported 

and that the signatures on the various forms were, in fact, his. The agents told LAPLANCHE that 

a total of over 50,000 rounds of ammunition were seized from the three vehicles and asked 

LAPLANCHE why the ammunition was not included on any of the contents lists. LAPLANCHE 

explained that he only wrote on the contents lists what he was directed to by the customer or the 

customer's family. 

The agents asked LAPLANCHE if he purchased the ammunition that was discovered in 

the three vehicles. LAPLANCH stated that he did buy some of the ammunition found in the 

three vehicles. When asked for whom he bought the ammunition, LAPLANCHE replied that 

he purchased the vehicles and some of the ammunition for a person in Haiti. 

LAPLANCHE stated he purchased some of the ammunition from Walmarts in Miami 

Gardens and Miami, Florida. LAPLANCHE stated that he knew buying and sending the 

ammunition was illegal, but that he did it to earn extra money. He also acknowledged that he 

saw signs posted Monarch Shipping that advises customers that shipping ammunition is 

prohibited. 

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 3 of 9
U.S. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") mailed LAPLANCHE a Notice of Seizure 

and Information to Claimants NON-CAFRA Form ("Notice of Seizure") for each of the 

aforementioned two separate seizures of ammunition on October 18, 2019 and October 29, 2019. 

Each Notice of Seizure sets forth four options for a potential claimant, and those options are also 

reflected in the "Election of Proceedings" Form that was included with each Notice of Seizure. 

One option provides that the claimant may abandon any claim or interest in the property, which in 

this case, involved the seized ammunition. The Notice of Seizure advises that, if a claimant 

chooses this option, Box #3 on the Election of Proceedings form should be checked and the 

completed form returned to CBP. 

LAPLANCHE completed and signed each Election of Proceedings form, and sent all three 

executed forms to CBP, copies of which are attached to the plea agreement. On each Election of 

Proceedings form, LAPLANCHE checked Box #3 indicating that he was abandoning any claim or 

interest in the seized ammunition. 

Date: By: 

By: 

Date: By: 

ARIANA FAJARDO ORSHAN 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

GREGORY SCHILLER 

ASSI T UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

'A DA VIS, ESQ. 

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 

� �LAPANCHE 

DEFENDANT 

9/21/2020

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 4 of 9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

vs. 

STANLEY LAPLANCHE, 

Defendant. 

_______________ ___,! 

PLEA AGREEMENT 

The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("this Office") and 

(hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") enter into the following agreement: 

1. The defendant agrees to plead guilty the information, which charges the defendant

with three counts of unlawful delivery of ammunition to a common carrier in violation of Title 18, 

United States Code, Sections 922(e) and 924(a)2 (l)(D). 

2. The defendant is aware that the sentence will be imposed by the Court after

considering the advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements (hereinafter 

"Sentencing Guidelines"). The defendant acknowledges and understands that the Court will 

compute an advisory sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines and that the applicable guidelines 

will be determined by the Court relying in part on the results of a pre-sentence investigation by the 

Court's probation office, which investigation will commence after the guilty plea has been entered. 

The defendant is also aware that, under certain circumstances, the Court may depart from the 

advisory sentencing guideline range that it has computed, and may raise or lower that advisory 

sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The defendant is further aware and understands that 

the Court is required to consider the advisory guideline range determined under the Sentencing 

20-CR-80061-RS

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 5 of 9
Guidelines, but is not bound to impose a sentence within that advisory range; the Court is permitted 

to tailor the ultimate sentence in light of other statutory concerns, and such sentence may be either 

more severe or less severe than the Sentencing Guidelines' advisory range. Knowing these facts, 

the defendant understands and acknowledges that the Court has the authority to impose any 

sentence within and up to the statutory maximum authorized by law for the offense(s) identified 

in paragraph 1 and that the defendant may not withdraw the plea solely as a result of the sentence 

imposed. 

3. The defendant also understands and acknowledges that the Court may impose a

statutory maximum term of imprisonment of up to five (5) years, followed by a term of supervised 

release of up to three (3) years as to each count. In addition to a term of imprisonment and 

supervised release, the Court may impose a fine of up to $250,000 (USO) as to each count. 

4. The defendant further understands and acknowledges that, in addition to any

sentence imposed under paragraph 3 of this agreement, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 3013, a 

special assessment in the amount of $100 as to each charge will be imposed on the defendant. The 

defendant agrees that this special assessment shall be paid at the time of sentencing. If the 

defendant is financially unable to pay the special assessment, the defendant agrees to present 

evidence to this Office and the Court at the time of sentencing as to the reasons for the defendant's 

failure to pay. 

5. This Office reserves the right to inform the Court and the probation office of all

facts pertinent to the sentencing process, including all relevant information concerning the offenses 

committed, whether charged or not, as well as concerning the defendant and the defendant's 

background. Subject only to the express terms of any agreed-upon sentencing recommendations 

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 6 of 9
contained in this agreement, this Office further reserves the right to make any recommendation as 

to the quality and quantity of punishment. 

6. This Office agrees that it will recommend at sentencing that the Court reduce by

two levels the sentencing guideline level applicable to the defendant's offense, pursuant to Section 

3El.1 (a) of the Sentencing Guidelines, based upon the defendant's recognition and affirmative 

and timely acceptance of personal responsibility. If at the time of sentencing the defendant's 

offense level is determined to be 16 or greater, this Office will file a motion requesting an 

additional one level decrease pursuant to Section 3El.1 (b) of the Sentencing Guidelines, stating 

that the defendant has assisted authorities in the investigation or prosecution of the defendant's 

own misconduct by timely notifying authorities of the defendant's intention to enter a plea of 

guilty, thereby permitting the government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the 

government and the Court to allocate their resources efficiently. This Office, however, will not 

be required to make this motion and this recommendation if the defendant: (1) fails or refuses to 

make a full, accurate and complete disclosure to the probation office of the circumstances 

surrounding the relevant offense conduct; (2) is found to have misrepresented facts to the 

government prior to entering into this plea agreement; or (3) commits any misconduct after 

entering into this plea agreement, including but not limited to committing a state or federal offense, 

violating any term of release, or making false statements or misrepresentations to any 

governmental entity or official. 

7. The defendant is aware that the sentence has not yet been determined by the Court.

The defendant also is aware that any estimate of the probable sentencing range or sentence that the 

defendant may receive, whether that estimate comes from the defendant's attorney, this Office, or 

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 7 of 9
the probation office, is a prediction, not a promise, and is not binding on this Office, the probation 

office or the Court. The defendant understands and acknowledges, as previously acknowledged in 

paragraph 2 above, that the defendant may not withdraw his plea based upon the Court's decision 

not to accept a sentencing recommendation made by the defendant, this Office, or a 

recommendation made jointly by the defendant and this Office. 

8. The defendant agrees as part of this plea agreement to abandon to the United States

Customs and Border Protection all right, title, claim, and interest to the property identified on the 

attached Notice of Seizure forms (attached hereto as Exhibits 1 and 2). 

9. The defendant is aware that Title 18, United States Code, Section 37 42 and Title

28, United States Code, Section 1291 afford the defendant the right to appeal the sentence imposed 

in this case. Acknowledging this, in exchange for the undertakings made by the United States in 

this plea agreement, the defendant hereby waives all rights conferred by Sections 3742 and 1291 

to appeal any sentence imposed, including any restitution order, or to appeal the manner in which 

the sentence was imposed, unless the sentence exceeds the maximum permitted by statute or is the 

result of an upward departure and/or an upward variance from the advisory guideline range that 

the Court establishes at sentencing. The defendant further understands that nothing in this 

agreement shall affect the government's right and/or duty to appeal as set forth in Title 18, United 

States Code, Section 37 42(b) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 1291. However, if the 

United States appeals the defendant's sentence pursuant to Sections 3742(b) and 1291, the 

defendant shall be released from the above waiver of appellate rights. By signing this agreement, 

the defendant acknowledges that the defendant has discussed the appeal waiver set forth in this 

agreement with the defendant's attorney. The defendant further agrees, together with this Office, 

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 8 of 9
to request that the Court enter a specific finding that the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal 

the sentence imposed in this case was knowing and voluntary. 

10. This is the entire agreement and understanding between this Office and the

defendant. There are no other agreements, promises, representations, or understandings. 

Date: By: 

Date: q\2\ )talP By: 

Date: By: 

ARIANA FAJARDO ORSHAN 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

u ....... � DA VIS, ESQ. 

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 

STANLE� 

DEFENDANT 

9/21/2020

Case 9:20-cr-80061-RS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/22/2020 Page 9 of 9