もちろん、あの話。
「ギャンブル依存症ではなく金銭欲」水原一平元通訳に禁錮4年9カ月と大谷翔平選手への賠償金約26億円を求刑
フジテレビ
国際取材部
2025年1月24日 金曜 午前9:41
ドジャースの大谷翔平選手の元通訳で銀行詐欺罪などに問われている水原一平被告について検察側は4年9か月の禁錮刑を求める文書を裁判所に提出しました。ドジャース・大谷翔平選手の元通訳・水原一平被告は大谷選手の口座から不正送金した銀行詐欺などの罪に問われています。
検察側は4年9か月の禁錮刑と、大谷選手への賠償金としておよそ1700万ドル日本円にして26億円余りの支払いなどの量刑を求めるとした文書を裁判所に提出しました。
検察側は、文書の中で水原被告はギャンブル依存症ではなく、むしろ金銭欲であったと指摘しています。
一方、水原被告側はこれまでギャンブル依存症であることを主張しています。
量刑は来月6日に言い渡される予定です。
www.fnn.jp
水原一平の裁判での証言、アメリカ人からスポーツ選手の名言風のかっこいいサムネにされてて笑った↓
— まことぴ (@makotopic) January 26, 2025
「ギャンブルをしているときだけ、人生に希望が持てた」 pic.twitter.com/TzNXbq5GSt
つまり、まだ結論は出ていない。依存症か、金銭欲か。
水原一平
— ウェルスナビび (@wealthnavi_days) January 24, 2025
「年俸7750万円という著しい低賃金であったために、ギャンブルだけが人生の希望だった」
舐めてんのかこいつ pic.twitter.com/ZTGgNcxaX0
これに対して、「ギャンブル依存症問題を考える会 」代表はこう語った。
水原さんの論告求刑での検察官の言い分に唖然としました。
— 田中紀子 Noriko Tanaka (@kura_sara) January 24, 2025
ギャンブル依存症じゃなくて、強欲とは、原因と結末が逆転してるでしょ。
アメリカの検察官でもこの程度かと記事を書きました。ぜひ読んでください。https://t.co/Rpy7zwvK6j
……水原さんに対し検察は「ギャンブル依存症ではなく強欲」と意見を述べ、その理由として、盗んだ金を野球カードの購入や歯科治療費の支払いなど、ギャンブルとは何も関係のない費用に充てていたと指摘しました。
この論告求刑を読んだ率直な感想は「依存症問題についてかなり理解のすすんでいる米国でもやっぱり検察はこんな論告をするんだ！」です。すっかり驚いてしまいました。
なぜ罪の元にある「ギャンブル依存症」を否定する？
なんで罪の原因である「ギャンブル依存症」を検察は否定したいのでしょうか？
もちろん日本の検察官も同様の戦略を取ります。
これは検察官及び社会全体も依存症に対し正しい理解を持っていないために起きていることであり、そして裁判というのは、時に科学的根拠よりも裁判官の感情が大きく影響するからだと思います。
私自身仲間の裁判に何度も立ち会ってきましたが、「なんで同じ様な事件なのに、こっちは執行猶予で、こっちは実刑なんだ？」という、裁判ガチャを何度も経験してきました。
検察としては、ことさら極悪人に仕立て上げたいのでしょう。裁判は結局の所、闘いの場であり、勝負事ですからね。
けれどもこういった「個人の性質の問題」に矮小化してしまい、ギャンブル依存症を犯罪の動機から切り離してしまうのは誰のためにもなりません。
（略）
こういった事件を防いでいくには何が必要かと言えば、「ギャンブルに手を出せば、ギャンブル依存症に罹患する可能性は誰にでもあり、これほどの事件を犯すまでになってしまうこともある」という啓発です。そして再犯防止のためには刑罰だけでなく治療が必要だということです。ここを切り離してしまったら、ただの精神論で解決策はなくなってしまいます。
さて、どうなんだろう？
この「依存症」と「人間の自由意思や自己責任」に関することは追っていたが、今回の判決はひとつの参考になるのかな。
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
m-dojo.hatenadiary.com
以下が、その求刑の文書なのかな？興味ある人は追ってもいいでしょう。おれはそこまででもないや。
Federal prosecutors want Shohei Ohtani's former interpreter Ippei Mizuhara to serve 57 months in prison for stealing $16+ million from the baseball star.
— Meghann Cuniff (@meghanncuniff) January 23, 2025
Sentencing recommendation filed today. Hearing is February 6 in Santa Ana. https://t.co/l6utGToi7F pic.twitter.com/zQYG9pIPEl
ポストする
新しいポストを表示
会話
メーガン・カニフ
メガン・クニフ
連邦検察は、大谷翔平の元通訳である水原一平に対し、野球界のスターから1600万ドル以上を盗んだ罪で懲役57ヶ月を求刑している。量刑勧告は本日提出された。公聴会は2月6日にサンタアナで行われる。https :// documentcloud.org/documents/2550 3004-usa-sentencing-rec-for-shoheis-interpretor/
Documents
USA sentencing rec for Shohei's interpretor
Sign in
🇺🇸
Feedback
USA sentencing rec for Shohei's interpretor
File
Text
Pages
Notes
Search
Search
p. 1
Share
1JOSEPH T. MCNALLY
Acting United States Attorney
LINDSEY GREER DOTSON
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
JEFF MITCHELL (Cal. Bar No. 236225)
Assistant United States Attorney
Major Frauds Section
1100 United States Courthouse
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-0698
Facsimile: (213) 894-3713
E-mail: jeff.mitchell@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
IPPEI MIZUHARA,
Defendant.
No. CR 24-00054-JWH
GOVERNMENT’S POSITION RE:
SENTENCING FOR DEFENDANT IPPEI
MIZUHARA; EXHIBIT; DECLARATION OF
AUSA JEFF MITCHELL
SENTENCING DATE: 02/06/2025
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel
of record, the Acting United States Attorney for the Central District
of California and Assistant United States Attorney Jeff Mitchell,
hereby files its position related to the sentencing of defendant
IPPEI MIZUHARA.
//
//
//
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:305
p. 2
ShareThe government’s sentencing position is based upon the attached
memorandum of points and authorities, the attached exhibit and
declaration, the files and records in this case, the Presentence
Report, and such further evidence and argument as the Court may
permit.
Dated: January 23, 2025 Respectfully submitted,
JOSEPH T. MCNALLY
Acting United States Attorney
LINDSEY GREER DOTSON
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
/s/ Jeff Mitchell
JEFF MITCHELL
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 2 of 15 Page ID #:306
p. 3
Share
1
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. INTRODUCTION
Former interpreter Ippei Mizuhara (“defendant”) engaged in a
long running fraud scheme against baseball player Shohei Ohtani - the
person he was hired to assist. His years-long theft of funds from
Mr. Ohtani and the myriad lies he told to Mr. Ohtani’s agents and
financial advisors to cover up his theft represent a calculated
betrayal of the very person he was hired to help.
On June 4, 2024, defendant pleaded guilty to both counts of the
Information in which he has been charged in this case, i.e., Bank
Fraud and Subscribing to a False Tax Return. (PSR ¶¶ 1-3.) There
are no remaining counts to be dismissed.
In defendant’s plea agreement, he admitted to all facts known to
the government. There are no additional uncharged facts or conduct.
Specifically, defendant admitted to the following facts:
Victim A was a professional baseball player from Japan who
signed a contract to play baseball for a Major League
Baseball team (the “Team”) located in the Central District
of California beginning in 2018. At approximately that same
time, defendant was hired by the Team to be a Japanese language interpreter for Victim A. Defendant also drove
Victim A to meetings and interpreted for Victim A outside
of baseball activities. Defendant acted as a de facto
manager and gatekeeper to Victim A. In that role, defendant
would regularly interact with Victim A’s sports agents and
financial advisors on behalf of Victim A because Victim A
did not speak English and Victim A’s agents and financial
advisors did not speak Japanese. Victim A paid defendant
separately for the additional work.
On March 8, 2018, defendant accompanied Victim A to a bank
in Phoenix, Arizona (“Bank A”), to assist Victim A in
opening a bank account to deposit his payroll salary. Bank
A was a domestic financial institution insured by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Inside Bank A,
defendant interpreted for Victim A and assisted him in
opening a bank account (the “x5848 Account”). Defendant
also interpreted for Victim A when the bank employee
provided Victim A the login information for the x5848
Account on Bank A’s website.
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 3 of 15 Page ID #:307
p. 4
Share
2
Beginning in or about September 2021, defendant began
placing sports bets with an illegal bookmaker. Shortly
thereafter, defendant began to lose bets and quickly became
indebted to the bookmaker. Unable to pay his gambling
debts, defendant orchestrated a scheme to deceive and cheat
Bank A in order to obtain money from the x5848 Account.
Beginning no later than November 2021 and continuing
through March 2024, defendant engaged in a scheme or plan
designed to fraudulently obtain money from the x5848
Account. Defendant recalled the password for the x5848
Account from when he assisted Victim A with opening the
account in 2018, and defendant was able to successfully
sign into the x5848 Account on Bank A’s website. After
obtaining access to the x5848 Account, defendant changed
the security protocols on the account without the
permission or authorization of Victim A. Specifically,
defendant changed the registered email address and phone
number on the account so Bank A employees would call
defendant, and not Victim A, when attempting to verify wire
transfers from the x5848 Account.
In furtherance of the scheme, defendant impersonated Victim
A and used Victim A’s personal identifying information to
trick and deceive Bank A employees into authorizing wire
transfers from x5848 Account. For example, on or about
February 2, 2022, Bank A denied an attempted wire transfer.
Defendant then called Bank A to complete the wire transfer.
During the call, defendant falsely identified himself as
Victim A and falsely stated that he was attempting to wire
funds to an associate of the bookmaker for a car loan. The
bank employee attempted to verify the caller by sending a
six-digit code via text message to the registered phone
number on the x5848 Account. Because defendant had already
changed the registered phone number on the account, the
bank’s text message was sent to defendant. Defendant then
read the six-digit code back to the Bank A employee and
completed the wire transfer. In total, defendant called
Bank A and impersonated Victim A on approximately 24
occasions.
Between November 2021 and March 2024, defendant regularly
logged into the x5848 Account through Bank A’s website and
initiated wire transfers from the x5848 account to the
bookmaker and his associates as payments for gambling
debts. For example, on June 20, 2023, defendant accessed
the x5848 Account from the Central District of California
pretending to be Victim A and wire transferred $500,000 to
an associate of the bookmaker. At a minimum, defendant
caused Bank A to transfer the following funds to bank
accounts of associates of the bookmaker:
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 4 of 15 Page ID #:308
p. 5
Share
3
Date Amounts Account
11/15/2021 1 wire for $40,010 Xoom.com
2/4/2022 1 wire for $300,000 X4010
2/28/2022 to
10/13/2023
36 wires totaling $15,000,000 X1911
12/15/2023
to 1/8/2024
3 wires totaling $1,250,000 X1530
Defendant did not notify, or seek permission from, Victim A
before transferring money from the x5848 Account.
In addition, in September 2023, defendant needed $60,000
worth of dental work. Victim A agreed to pay for
defendant’s dental work and authorized a check to defendant
for $60,000 drawn on a business account at Bank B; however,
without permission or authorization, defendant provided his
dentist with Victim A’s debit card number for the x5848
Account and charged $60,000 to the x5848 Account. After
defendant paid his dentist with Victim A’s debit card,
defendant then deposited the $60,000 check from Victim A
into defendant’s personal checking account for defendant’s
personal use.
Between January and March 2024, defendant also purchased
approximately $325,000 worth of baseball cards at online
resellers eBay and Whatnot, with payments drawn on the
x5848 Account, including baseball cards featuring Yogi
Berra, Juan Soto, and Victim A. Defendant purchased the
above-described collectible baseball cards from eBay and
Whatnot with the intent to resell them at a later date and
use the proceeds for his own personal benefit.
When Victim A’s sports agent and financial advisors asked
defendant for access to the x5848 Account, defendant
falsely told them that Victim A did not want them to access
[] the account because it was private. In truth and in fact
as defendant then knew, defendant did not want Victim A’s
sports agent and financial advisors to review the x5848
Account because he feared they would notice that defendant
stole millions of dollars from Victim A. Based on
defendant’s false statements of material fact, defendant
fraudulently obtained more than $16,975,010 from the x5848
Account.
Defendant also admits that defendant knowingly and
willfully falsely reported his total taxable income to the
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) on his tax return for tax
year 2022. Specifically, on or about February 1, 2024, in
Los Angeles County, defendant willfully made and subscribed
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 5 of 15 Page ID #:309
p. 6
Share
4
to a materially false United States Individual Income Tax
Return, Form 1040, for tax year 2022, which was filed with
the IRS and verified by a written declaration that it was
made under the penalties of perjury, which return defendant
did not believe to be true and correct as to every material
matter, in that defendant reported on line 15 that his
total taxable income for calendar year 2022 was $136,865,
when, in truth and in fact, as defendant then knew, his
total taxable income for the year 2022 was substantially
higher than he reported. For instance, defendant filed as
“single,” and claimed a $10,000 deduction in Schedule A,
line 5e, when, in truth and in fact, as defendant then
knew, he was married and only entitled to a $5,000
deduction. Defendant also admits that he failed to report
additional income of $4,100,000 for the year 2022.
Defendant admits that the source of the unreported income
was from the bank fraud scheme on the x5848 Account
described above.
The false information provided by defendant was material in
that it affected the IRS’s calculation of the amount of
income that defendant had received in 2022, and prevented
the IRS from verifying the accuracy of the amount of tax
claimed to be owed on the return and determining whether
additional income tax was owed. As a result of the false
information defendant provided, defendant owes additional
taxes of approximately $1,149,400 for tax year 2022 (before
interest and penalties).
(Plea Agreement ¶ 16.)1
II. THE PRESENTENCE REPORT
The United States Probation Office (“USPO”) prepared a
Presentence Report (“PSR”), which was disclosed to the parties on
September 18, 2024. The PSR calculated the total offense level
applicable to defendant to be 25. (PSR ¶ 72.) The PSR also
calculated a criminal history category of I. (PSR ¶ 77.) The PSR
calculated the guideline sentence to be 57 to 71 months’
imprisonment, between two and five years of supervised release for
Count One, one year of supervised release for Count Two, a fine range
1 The victim has publicly identified himself as Shohei Ohtani.
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 6 of 15 Page ID #:310
p. 7
Share
5
of $20,000 to $1,000,000, and a mandatory special assessment of $200.
(PSR ¶¶ 120, 125, 126, 134, 135.)
III. PROBATION OFFICE’S RECOMMENDATION
The USPO has recommended a variance below the Guideline range.
Specifically, the USPO recommended the following sentence: a 48-month
term of imprisonment, a three-year term of supervised release,
restitution of $16,975,010 to Shohei Ohtani and $1,149,400 to the
IRS, and a special assessment of $200. (USPO Recommendation Letter
at 1-2.) The Probation Officer found that defendant does not have
the ability to pay a fine. (Id. at 2.)
IV. NO OBJECTIONS TO THE PRESENTENCE REPORT
The United States does not object to the findings set forth in
the PSR.
V. THE GOVERNMENT’S RECOMMENDATION
The United States objects to the Probation Officer’s
recommended sentence below the Guideline range.
Accordingly, and as set forth herein, the United States submits
that defendant should be sentenced for an overall offense level of 25
and a criminal history category I, that is, a term of 57 months’
imprisonment, followed by a three-year term of supervised release,
and a mandatory special assessment of $200. The recommended sentence
addresses the considerations set forth at 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a), as discussed herein.
A. The Nature and Circumstances of The Offense and the History
and Characteristics of the Defendant
Section 3553(a)(1) provides that the Court shall consider the
nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and
characteristics of the defendant.
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 7 of 15 Page ID #:311
p. 8
Share
6
In 2018, defendant worked as Mr. Ohtani’s interpreter and was
employed by a Southern California baseball team. (PSR ¶ 97.) At
that time, defendant began participating in frequent private poker
games with team players held in hotel rooms. (Id.) According to
defendant, it was at this time that he was first introduced to Mathew
Bowyer, the bookmaker who ran the illegal sportsbook. (Id.)
Defendant was initially paid a salary of $85,000 by the team,
but it increased significantly in 2022 to $250,000. (PSR ¶ 99.)
Defendant’s salary increased again in 2024 to $500,000 when he was
employed by a new baseball team. (PSR ¶ 106.) In addition to his
employment with the MLB teams, Mr. Ohtani provided defendant an
additional salary and provided him a Porsche Cayenne to drive. (PSR
¶ 108; Complaint Affidavit ¶ 32, Dkt. No. 1.) Despite these
considerably generous salaries, they were unable to keep pace with
defendant’s gambling debt to Bowyer. Between December 2021 and
January 2024, defendant placed approximately 19,000 bets online
through Bowyer’s illegal sportsbook and quickly incurred a debt of
$40,678,436.94. (PSR ¶ 73.) Defendant stole more than $16 million
dollars from Mr. Ohtani to repay a portion of the debt.
Based on defendant’s previous court filings, the government
expects defendant to argue that the offense conduct was caused by an
addiction to gambling. Even if defendant is addicted to gambling, it
cannot fully explain defendant’s conduct because defendant used the
stolen funds for numerous personal expenses that had nothing to do
with gambling. For example, defendant used Mr. Ohtani’s debit card
to charge approximately $325,000 to eBay for baseball cards. (PSR
¶ 27.) In addition, when defendant needed dental work, he asked Mr.
Ohtani for financial help. Mr. Ohtani agreed to pay for the dental
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 8 of 15 Page ID #:312
p. 9
Share
7
work and issued a check for $60,000. Instead of using the check to
pay for the dental work, defendant deposited the check into his
personal bank account and then used Mr. Ohtani’s debit card to pay
for the dental work, without Mr. Ohtani’s authorization or knowledge.
Defendant did not use the additional funds from the check, or sell
the baseball cards, to repay the gambling debt to Bowyer. Instead,
they were deposited into his personal account and used for personal
expenditures. Further, and most compelling, when defendant actually
won money from Bowyer, he didn’t repay Mr. Ohtani or credit the
account from which he had stolen the funds. (Complaint Affidavit
¶ 16.) Instead, he instructed Bowyer to wire the money to
defendant’s personal bank account. (Id.) This conduct undermines
any argument that his offense was caused by an addiction and
highlights another potential cause – greed.
Further, this was not an isolated incident. Indeed, the full
scope of the scheme was years in the making. Defendant unlawfully
gained access to Mr. Ohtani’s bank account in September 2021, changed
the registered phone number to defendant’s cell phone, and then began
impersonating Mr. Ohtani when the bank called to authorize the wire
transfers to Bowyer’s associates. (Exhibit; PSR ¶¶ 21-22.) His
criminal conduct continued for more than two years.
Even if defendant was able to repay the victim, which he cannot,
defendant’s conduct has harmed Mr. Ohtani in more ways than simply
economic harm. Indeed, defendant’s conduct has harmed Mr. Ohtani’s
greatest asset – his reputation and goodwill. Even though the
Complaint Affidavit attempted to clear the record by describing the
overwhelming evidence that showed that Mr. Ohtani had no knowledge of
defendant’s criminal activities, several public figures continued to
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 9 of 15 Page ID #:313
p. 10
Share
8
question how Mr. Ohtani did not notice that this one particular
account was being mismanaged.2 Further, to this day, major e commerce websites sell merchandise that have turned Mr. Ohtani into a
meme and suggest that he was involved in the criminal activity.
To be clear, Mr. Ohtani is a victim. Mr. Ohtani did not speak
English and none of his agents, accountants, or financial advisors
spoke Japanese. (Complaint Affidavit ¶ 24(j).) Mr. Ohtani relied on
defendant to communicate with the outside world, including his
financial advisors. Indeed, it was this language barrier that made
defendant the gatekeeper to Mr. Ohtani. When his agents and
financial advisors repeatedly asked defendant for access to the x5848
Account, defendant abused his position as gatekeeper and falsely told
them that Mr. Ohtani did not want them to access the account. (PSR
¶ 29.) In truth, defendant lied to the agents and financial
advisors, and prevented them from protecting Mr. Ohtani, because
defendant feared they would discover that he stole millions of
dollars.
In mitigation, the government recognizes that defendant is no
longer an interpreter or in a position to take advantage of those
close to him, which was the environment in which the crime occurred.
In addition, the negative publicity surrounding defendant’s felony
conviction serves as a deterrent for both defendant and others from
engaging in similar conduct. Finally, the government recognizes that
2 Available at:
https://www.themirror.com/sport/baseball/pete-rose-dodgers-ohtani remark-448220
https://www.natesilver.net/p/i-still-have-2-big-questions-about
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 10 of 15 Page ID
#:314
p. 11
Share
9signed a consent form consenting to the search of his cell phone.
These factors are not accounted for in the Guidelines; however, the
Court can, and should, consider these factors under 3553(a). Indeed,
consideration of these facts under 3553(a) will encourage defendants
in the future to accept responsibility early and save additional
government and judicial resources. Defendant’s early acceptance of
responsibility here is evidence of his respect for the law, which
should be considered under 3553(a)(2).
C. NEED TO AVOID UNWARRANTED SENTENCE DISPARITIES
Section 3553(a)(6) provides that in determining the particular
sentence, the Court shall consider the need to avoid unwarranted
sentence disparities. Following the recommended sentencing
guideline range will avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among
defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of
similar conduct.
VI. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the government respectfully requests
that the Court impose a sentence of 57 months’ imprisonment, three
years of supervised release, restitution of $16,975,010 to Shohei
Ohtani and $1,149,400 to the IRS, and a special assessment of $200.
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 12 of 15 Page ID
#:316
p. 13
Share
1DECLARATION OF JEFF MITCHELL
I, Jeff Mitchell, declare as follows:
1. I am an Assistant United States Attorney in the United
States Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. I
represent the government in this case.
2. Attached hereto as an exhibit to the Government’s
Sentencing Position for Defendant Ippei Mizuhara is an audio file of
a phone call obtained from Bank A, as described in the Complaint
Affidavit. (Dkt. No. 1.)
3. I instructed IRS Special Agent Chris Seymour to edit the
audio file to redact the name of Bank A and the name of the
unindicted co-conspirator mentioned in the call.
4. Other than those modifications, the audio file is a true
and accurate representation of the evidence obtained from Bank A.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that the foregoing is true and correct and that
this declaration is executed at Los Angeles, California, on January
23, 2025.
JEFF MITCHELL
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 13 of 15 Page ID
#:317
p. 14
Share
EXHIBIT
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 14 of 15 Page ID
#:318
p. 15
Share
CD with Audio File
Case 8:24-cr-00054-JWH Document 67 Filed 01/23/25 Page 15 of 15 Page ID
#:319
Page
7
of 15
100%
Download File
Share & Embed
View in Legacy DocumentCloud
Contributed by
Meghann M. Cuniff (MeghannMCuniff)
Created on
2025/1/24
Last updated on
2025/1/24
Language
English
USA sentencing rec for Shohei's interpretor | DocumentCloud
