Page 1 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO: 22-20423-CR-SCOLA/GOODMAN

NEPMAR J. ESCALONA,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

MOTION FOR DOWNWARD VARIANCE

Defendant Nepmar J. Escalona (“Mr. Escalona”), through his undersigned attorney, 

pursuant to Rule 32, Fed. R. Crim. P. and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), hereby submits his motion 

requesting a downward variance from the bottom of his sentencing guidelines range.

I. INTRODUCTION

On September 7, 2022, Mr. Escalona was indicted and charged in a one count indictment 

with money laundering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). Subsequently, on March 

4, 2024, He pled guilty to the conspiracy to money laundering count pursuant to a plea agreement. 

DE #93. Thereafter Mr. Escalona provided all information required for the preparation of his 

Presentence Report (“PSR”). The initial copy of the PSR was received on April 19, 2024. After 

examining the PSR, Mr. Escalona has no objections to the factual content or the guidelines 

calculations. He now files his motion for a downward variance in accordance with § 3553(a).

II. MR. ESCALONA MERITS A § 3553(a) FACTORS DOWNWARD VARIANCE

In Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), the Supreme Court explained that the 

Sentencing Guidelines serve as a “starting point and initial benchmark,” but the district court has 

authority, based on its “individualized assessment” of the facts, to weigh the factors listed in 

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 1 of 9
Page 2 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

section 3553(a) and fashion a sentence outside the guidelines. Id. at 49-51. After the guidelines 

calculations are determined “the District Court may impose a more severe or more lenient sentence 

as song as the sentence is reasonable.” United States v. Crawford, 407 F.3d 11174, 1179 (11th Cir. 

2005). The sentencing judge must “’consider every convicted person as an individual and every 

case as a unique study in [] human failings.’” Id. at 52 (quoting from Koon, 518 U.S. at 113.) The 

goal is to impose a sentence that is reasonable, meaning that is sufficient, but not greater than 

necessary. See §3553(a). 1

In Mr. Escalona’s case, a strict application of the advisory guidelines produces a sentence 

that is “greater than necessary” under the § 3553(a) factors. And the § 3553(a) factors tilt in his 

favor and warrant a sentence below the guidelines for the reasons discussed below.

(a) Discussion of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors

(1) The Nature of the Offense and History and Characteristics of the Defendant

(a) Characteristics of the Defendant

1 § 3553(a) provides the following seven factors that the court must consider in determining the 

particular sentence to be imposed:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;

(2) the need for the sentence imposed (A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote 

respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; (B) to afford adequate 

deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and 

(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other 

correctional treatment in the most effective manner;

(3) the kinds of sentences available;

(4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for ... [inapplicable categories of 

offenses to the instant case];

(5) any pertinent policy statement ...[none applicable to the instant case];

(6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who 

have been found guilty of similar conduct; and

(7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 2 of 9
Page 3 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

Mr. Escalona is a first-time offender. This is his only encounter with the criminal justice 

system. He was born in Venezuela and became a U.S. citizen after he emigrated to the United 

States in 2013. He came to the U.S. with his wife, Blanca Carolina Diaz, and his daughter and son. 

The daughter, Amanda, is 25 years old and is presently studying in Spain for a master’s degree in 

the area of human reproduction. And the son, Carlos, is 18 years old, resides with his parents, and 

is completing second year of college and then will finish the last two years at Florida International 

University. Mr. Escalona’s father, Neptaly Escalona, age 78, and his mother, Rosario Escalona 

Enriquez, age 73, are alive and live in Chile. The parents used to live in Venezuela but had to move 

to Chile because of collateral consequences related to this case, which will be explained at the 

sentencing hearing. As can be gleaned from the PSR, this is a close family, where Mr. Escalona 

and his wife enjoy an “excellent” relationship and their children have shown a desire to get ahead 

in school and appear to be on their way to being productive members of the community. In sum, 

Mr. Escalona is blessed that he’s loved and supported by a united and loving family.

Mr. Escalona, after graduating high school, entered a military institute; that is, an officer 

training school that provided the equivalent of a college degree, but some of the studies focused 

on military history, skills, and strategy. He also obtained a master’s degree from Universidad Santa 

Maria. After his studies, he served honorably in the Guardia Nacional of Venezuelan for 15 years. 

For personal and family reasons, Mr. Escalona thought it would be a better future for him and his 

family if he resigned his position in the Guardia Nacional and dedicated himself full-time to the 

business of importing and exporting fruits and goods. In fact, prior to his resignation from the 

Guardia Nacional, he had already been involved for years in the business of importing and 

exporting fruits (e.g., apples, pears, etc.) from Chile directly to Caribbean countries and from

United States to Venezuela. 

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 3 of 9
Page 4 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

(b) Nature of the Offense

The nature of the offense is described in the PSR in ¶¶ 14-21, and concededly it is a serious 

offense. However, additional context regarding the circumstances surrounding the offense will be 

provided at the sentencing hearing that we believe will incline the Court to grant Mr. Escalona’s 

motion for downward variance.

(2) The Purpose of Sentencing (Retribution, Deterrence, and Rehabilitation)

It is conceded that retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation are factors the Court must 

consider for sentencing purposes. They play a role in formulating an appropriate sentence. But in 

arriving at an appropriate sentence, the Court must weigh all the § 3553(a) factors together in order 

to impose a sentence that is “sufficient but not greater than necessary.”

Mr. Escalona has already absorbed much pain and suffering because of his arrest and 

prosecution in this case. The emotional and financial consequences have been devastating. For the 

first time in his life, Mr. Escalona has had to dig deep into his soul to reexamine his actions and

determine how and went he abandoned his principles code, and how in the process he ended up 

violating the laws of the United States. This has been a painful processthat has led to the realization 

that he has failed in upholding all the valuable principles instilled in him by his parents, failed his 

wife and children who for so long have admired him for doing things the right way, failed his 

friends as well, who always thought so highly of him, and failed his community who saw him as 

someone worthy of admiration. In sum, Mr. Escalona has been emotionally devastated by the 

realization that he has brought about so much burden and misery upon himself and those he loves 

the most. And now, he seeks a chance to rebuild his life and, hopefully, regain some self-respect, 

something that’s truly important to move forward with his life.

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 4 of 9
Page 5 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

From a financial perspective, Mr. Escalona has also brought nothing but misery to himself 

and his family. He has not been able to work since his arrest. As part of his bail conditions, he has 

been confined to his home, under GPS electronic monitoring since September 1, 2022. So, for 

almost two years, he has not produced any income at all. Instead, he and his family have lived (on 

a government approved) monthly allowance. The allowance money is drawn monthly from a bank 

account where the sale proceeds of the family home in Hollywood, Florida had been deposited. 

Compounding his misfortune, Mr. Escalona had to pay a significant amount to two previous 

lawyers who represented him during much of the time the case was pending and pay a significant 

amount to his present lawyer as well. These payments to attorneys, investigators, and collateral 

expenses have considerably diminished the family’s savings. Also, as part of the plea agreement, 

Mr. Escalona will pay at the time of sentencing $841,694.88, which represents double the amount 

of the required restitution. To make this payment, Mr. Escalona was forced to sell some family 

property that was originally intended to provide income during the retirement years. And the road 

ahead for Mr. Escalona doesn’t get easier because he will have to find a way to provide for his 

family in the future while carrying the heavy burden of a tattered reputation and being a convicted 

felon. A crushing punishment by any measure.

Anyone with knowledge of the difficult circumstances surrounding Mr. Escalona’s life 

would agree that he has suffered immensely as a result of the offense. And more shame and 

punishment will come his way the day of sentencing, when he will stand before the Court,

something that was unthinkable at a point in his life. That day, at sentencing, at stake will be his 

liberty, his self-dignity, the shame of facing the consequences of his own selfish actions, and

countless things that will undoubtably swirl through his mind. 

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 5 of 9
Page 6 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

Additional consequences reflecting retribution and deterrence will be presented at the 

sentencing in a more private and proper setting.

(3) The Kinds of Sentences Available

Section 3553(a) expressly dictates that “[t]he Court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but 

not greater than necessary.” As Judge Rakoff pointed out in United States v. Adelson, 441 F. 

Supp.2d 506, 515 (S.D.N.Y. 2006), the operative word in § 3553(a) is “necessary.” For that reason, 

it’s important to seek a sentencing option that is not more punitive than necessary when taking into 

account all the § 3553(a) factors. The Court here may consider options beyond strict imprisonment, 

such as the use of home detention, probation, or community service to fashion an appropriate 

sentence.

In this case, if the Court decides that strict imprisonment is the most appropriate sentence,

we suggest a sentence of a year and a day of imprisonment,. Or, if the Court decides a more 

appropriate disposition is a split sentence, we suggest a sentence consisting of a shorter period of 

imprisonment (e.g., six months) and home confinement. It’s worth mentioning that Mr. Escalona 

has already served almost two years of home confinement, without any incidents, and this 

curtailment of rights and freedoms also should receive some consideration in fashioning a sentence 

in this case.

(4) and (5) The Advisory Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements

These two sections speak to policy matters that are not specifically directed at the issues 

pertinent to this case.

(6) The Need to Avoid Unwarranted Sentencing Disparities

Mr. Escalona is the only individual indicted here, albeit some others could have been, but 

were not. So, the issue of sentencing disparities is not presented.

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 6 of 9
Page 7 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

(7) The Need to Provide Restitution to Any Victims of the Offense

This case does not call for restitution, but it does involve forfeiture. These two separate and 

distinct legal remedies seem to travel together and frequently in white-collar cases. The case law 

and sentencing guidelines permit downward departures for extraordinary restitution, and we 

respectfully submit a like concession should occur as to exceptional forfeiture payments, which go 

beyond those the law requires.

It is well-established law in this Circuit that extraordinary restitution is a permissible basis 

for a downward Sentencing Guidelines’ departure. United States v. Kim, 364 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 

2004). The Court may grant a downward departure “’if the factor [restitution] is present to an 

exceptional degree or in some other way makes the case different from the ordinary case.’” Id. at 

1240 (quoting Koon v. United States, 518 U.S. 81, 95-96 (1996) (emphasis added). See also, 

United States v. Anderson, 267 Fed. Appx. 847 (11th Cir. 2008) (on petition for rehearing) 

(affirming the district court’s sentence of three years’ probation and six months home detention 

because the defendant made prompt, pre-sentence restitution; despite that the guidelines 

recommended 18 to 24 months incarceration and the defendant had committed 18 insider trading 

transactions with profits of $135,000). 

Here, Mr. Escalona is not required to pay restitution, but he must pay forfeiture. He will 

pay the day of sentencing $841,694.88 for forfeiture, which translates to double the required 

amount. We submit this voluntary payment is extraordinary and constitutes an exceptional effort 

to atone for, or remedy, the harm caused by the offense – and it merits the granting of a downward 

variance.

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 7 of 9
Page 8 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

CONCLUSION

Mr. Escalona is an individual deserving a second chance. His kindness and great qualities 

can be garnered from four character letters submitted on his behalf: (*) Exhibit “1,” is a letter from 

FUNDASE, a non-profit foundation in Venezuela attesting that Mr. Escalona volunteered his 

services for 10 years to that foundation with the aim to “develop, promote, and protect the best 

living conditions for disabled people, homeless individuals, children, adolescents, and abandoned 

elderly people, low-income individuals, pregnant women at risk, providing them with support, 

shelter, food, education, Christian teachings ...”; (**) Exhibit “2,” is a letter from the Archdiocese 

of Valencia, Venezuela, attesting that Mr. Escalona was a faithful parishioner in that Catholic 

church community while living in that community; (***) Exhibit “3,” is a letter from Margarita 

Vare Sanchez, who expresses her gratitude in being able to thank Mr. Escalona for his financial 

help and moral support during 10 difficult years while her mother battle serious medical 

complications; and (****) Exhibit “4,” a letter from Katiuska Elena Rodriguez Pinto, who Mr. 

Escalona helped to pay for medical expenses incurred when she gave birth to prematurely born 

twins, and the funeral expenses for the one who unfortunately passed. These letters put things in 

perspective the kindness, humanity, and goodness within Mr. Escalona. And we respectfully 

submit a downward variance is merited for this man, who through his actions has demonstrated he 

deserves it.

Respectfully submitted,

s/Jose M. Quinon

Jose M. Quinon

JOSE M. QUINON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Tel. (305) 858-5700

Fax (305) 358-7848

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 8 of 9
Page 9 of 9

JOSE M. QUIÑON, P.A.

75 Valencia Avenue, Suite 800, Coral Gables, FL 33134 Tel. (305) 858-5700. Fax (305) 358-7848 jquinon@quinonlaw.com

Cell (786) 348-3778

Email: jquinon@quinonlaw.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Defendant Nepmar Escalona’s Motion for 

Downward Variance was filed on May 2, 2024, via PACER, which will serve a copy on all 

concerned parties. 

s/Jose M. Quinon

Jose M. Quinon

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS Document 103 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2024 Page 9 of 9