In Sin Filtros, we detail the hearing scheduled for October 29 before the sentencing of the former head of the Venezuelan intelligence service, accused by the U.S. of drug terrorism offenses.
Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein has approved a Fatico hearing before the sentencing of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal. This hearing will allow both the prosecution and the defense to present evidence and arguments to assist the judge in determining an appropriate sentence, ranging from a minimum of 20 years to life in prison.
This hearing is named after the 1979 case “United States vs. Fatico,” which established such procedures for resolving disputed facts relevant to sentencing. Stay tuned, as we will provide all the details of this critical court appearance for Carvajal, accused of drug terrorism, as well as for other conspirators of the Cartel de Los Soles, the criminal organization composed of military personnel and Venezuelan officials, including Nicolás Maduro and Diosdado Cabello.
Diosdado Cabello’s Reaction and the Fear of Fugitives
It’s important to highlight the apparent fear of Diosdado Cabello, one of the main accused in this massive conspiracy. He has resorted to psychological tactics to confuse the audience and discredit the press. As his lies run thin, this criminal, wanted by justice with a $25 million bounty, has no option but to accuse journalists of his own crimes, even utilizing U.S. platforms like YouTube. This tactic, far from intimidating, expands opportunities to continue investigating and disseminating information with evidence, exposing the cornered mafia.
In addition to the witnesses testifying in court about the criminal activities of “El Pollo” Carvajal and the Cartel de Los Soles (including Diosdado Cabello), the prosecution will present law enforcement agents, videos, photographs, emails, and other evidence. These will be used for the judge to determine the sentence of one of the cartel’s main leaders, close to Cabello and other members who remain fugitives, fearing they will be next in the witness stand.
Cabello’s intelligence apparatus is so inadequate that it can’t even identify whom he’s accusing of his own crimes. Fear clouds the minds of those who feel their days are numbered. Cases like those of “El Chapo” Guzmán, “El Mayo” Zambada, and the Sinaloa Cartel, close partners of the Cartel de Los Soles, demonstrate that their main leaders, like “El Pollo” Carvajal, grovel for acceptance as protected witnesses to reduce their sentences and avoid dying in U.S. prisons. Panic prevents them from thinking clearly and understanding whom they are harassing to remain silent about Carvajal’s case, the “pearls” he wants to sing, and whom he will betray first. They have committed mistake after mistake, which is as interesting as it is entertaining due to the displayed clumsiness and mediocrity.
Key Details of Carvajal’s Fatico Hearing
Returning to the topic that generates such panic among the members of the Cartel de Los Soles, Diosdado Cabello, and company: the evidence the prosecutors will present during the Fatico hearing for “El Pollo” Carvajal.
One revelation is that Hugo Carvajal Barrios is not married to Angélica Flores. He swore to Judge Hellerstein that he is divorced and has daughters aged 7, 9, and 13, and two adopted sons aged 10, in addition to a 39-year-old daughter. The dependent children live with their mothers (plural).
The judge warned Carvajal that, at a minimum, he faces 20 years in prison and a monetary fine of $250,000, with a maximum of $10 million. The judge also made it clear that the sentence will be severe given the characteristics of the case, and that Carvajal should not expect discretion. “Don’t be disappointed with my sentence, I’m warning you now,” said the magistrate, observing the distressed face of “El Pollo” Carvajal.
The prosecutors also reminded that the charges against Carvajal involve a group of drug terrorists like the FARC. During the Fatico hearing, numerous correspondences from the FARC mentioning meetings with the accused and his accomplices will be shown, testimonies from law enforcement agents, photos, videos, evidence of drug shipments to Mexico, and testimonies from drug traffickers. They also mentioned the Pimentel letter, which will be adjusted on pages 2 and 3 before sentencing.
The judge also discussed the 450 kilos of cocaine, which carries an offense level of 38. Combined with the rest of the charges, this level could rise to over 62. However, this level will be reduced because Carvajal acknowledged his responsibility, gaining credits. Therefore, the offense level considered will be 43, leading to a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years, 30 years for other charges, up to life in prison, and deportation from the country after serving the sentence.
The judge indicated he would manage the evidence. Carvajal’s lawyers stated that the amount of cocaine should be reduced to 5 kilos or more, as part of the plea agreement emphasized in the Pimentel letter, and that the accused reserves the right, as granted by law, to change his position after the sentencing hearing. The prosecution claimed to have sufficient evidence and the appearance of their witnesses was accepted.
The judge asked Carvajal if he was the head of intelligence, to which he clarified that he was the head of military intelligence until 2008, when he was transferred to the military counterintelligence unit, taking control of the agency. In 2013, he returned to the DIM. The judge approved an interview with the probation officer, a prerequisite to sentencing, and authorized his defense attorney to accompany him during this interview. The judge also noted that Carvajal, despite the charge, had no criminal record in the U.S.
What is a Fatico Hearing?
A Fatico hearing is a crucial judicial procedure in the U.S. justice system.
Purpose: It allows the judge to gather additional information or resolve disputes regarding the facts of the pre-sentence report (PSR) that could affect the accused’s sentencing. It ensures the sentencing decision is based on accurate and reliable information.
Timing: It takes place after the accused has been convicted (often through a guilty plea or a trial) but before the final sentence.
Participants: Includes the judge, the defendant, the defense attorney, the prosecutor, and sometimes witnesses presenting testimony or evidence.
Evidence: Both parties can present evidence, including witness testimony, documents, or other materials. The defense can present mitigating factors (e.g., the defendant’s background, mental health issues), while the prosecution can introduce aggravating factors (e.g., the severity of the crime, impact on the victim).
Burden of Proof: Unlike a trial, which requires evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a Fatico hearing usually employs a lower standard, such as “preponderance of evidence” or “clear and convincing evidence,” depending on the case and jurisdiction.
Hearsay Testimony: Hearsay evidence may be admissible but often requires corroboration to ensure reliability, as established in the Fatico case.
Objectives of a Fatico Hearing
Resolve Factual Controversies: Address disagreements between the prosecution and defense about the facts of the pre-sentence report, such as the degree of the accused’s involvement in the crime or other sentencing factors.
Inform the Sentence: Provide the judge with a comprehensive view of the case, including mitigating or aggravating circumstances, to ensure a fair and individualized sentence.
Guarantee Due Process: Allow the accused the opportunity to challenge potentially inaccurate or harmful information in the PSR, thus protecting their rights during sentencing.
Tailor the Sentence: Assist the judge in deciding the appropriate penalty within sentencing guidelines, which could range from a lighter sentence to a harsher one based on the evidence presented.
Example: If a defendant is convicted of a drug charge, a Fatico hearing may be held to determine the exact amount of drugs involved, as this could significantly impact the sentence. The prosecution might present evidence of a large quantity of drugs, while the defense could argue for a smaller amount or highlight the defendant’s minor role in the operation. The judge would use this evidence to decide the appropriate sentence.
Differences with Other Hearings
Vs. Trial: A Fatico hearing focuses on sentencing facts, not on guilt or innocence, and does not involve a jury.
Vs. Preliminary Hearing: A preliminary hearing determines if there is probable cause to proceed to trial, while a Fatico hearing occurs after conviction and focuses on sentencing.
Vs. Disposition Hearing: A disposition hearing can address the overall resolution of the case (e.g., plea agreements or trial scheduling), while a Fatico hearing specifically addresses sentencing evidence.
Next Judicial Steps
Fatico hearings are crucial for ensuring that sentencing decisions are fair and based on reliable evidence. They provide both parties the opportunity to present their arguments and help the judge tailor the sentence to the specific circumstances of the accused and the crime.
This week, prosecutors must submit protocol requirements to the Probation Office to prepare for the interview with the defendant.
Factual Statement of the Offense for the Probation Department
A “factual statement of the offense” for the Probation Department is an objective and detailed account of the facts related to a person’s crime. It’s prepared to be presented to the judge and the probation department before sentencing.
This report, often included in the presentence investigation report (PSI), describes the specific circumstances of the crime, including:
- How it was carried out.
- The role of the accused.
- The actions of co-defendants or participants.
- Any impact on the victims.
The goal is to provide a clear and verifiable factual basis to assist the judge in determining the appropriate sentence and for the probation officer to supervise the individual during the probation period. The information must be impartial, based on investigations, and when discrepancies arise, the probation officer uses their best judgment to resolve them.
Minutes from Carvajal’s Plea Hearing
Below is an excerpt from the minutes of the plea hearing for Hugo Armando Carvajal-Barrios, held on June 25, 2025, before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein:
- The accused Hugo Armando Carvajal-Barrios (1) (in custody) was present with his attorney Robert A. Feitel.
- The prosecutors Nicholas S. Bradley, Kaylan E. Lasky, and Kevin T. Sullivan were present.
- The court reporter Nicole Dimasi and Spanish interpreters Humberto García and Jill Hoskins were present.
- DEA special agents Michael Stanton and Sarah Devine-Powell, along with U.S. paralegal specialist Sabrina Tim, were also present.
- The plea hearing was held. The accused took an oath and was informed of his rights.
- The accused withdrew his previously entered not guilty plea and pled GUILTY to charges 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the superseding indictment S1.
- The Pimentel letter was presented as exhibit number 1.
- The Pre-Sentence Investigation Report (PSI) was ordered.
- The Government must submit a factual statement of the offense to the Probation Department within the next 7 days.
- The defense attorney must schedule the interview with the Probation Department within the next 14 days. The Probation Department will not conduct any interviews without the defense attorney’s participation.
- Sentencing is scheduled for October 29, 2025 .
- The defendant’s sentencing arguments must be presented two weeks before sentencing; the Government’s arguments must be submitted one week before sentencing.
- Continued detention at the Metropolitan Center in Brooklyn, New York.
Possibilities of Cooperation Benefits for Drug Terrorism Defendants in the U.S.
A drug terrorism defendant in New York who pleads guilty and cooperates with justice may have several opportunities for benefits, depending on various factors. In the U.S. judicial system, substantial cooperation with the authorities (such as providing truthful and useful information about other criminals, criminal networks, or illicit activities) can lead to a sentence reduction. This is typically governed by federal sentencing guidelines and the agreement with the prosecution.
Sentence Reduction: If the defendant offers information that leads to arrests, convictions, or the dismantling of criminal organizations (like the Sinaloa Cartel or Cartel de Los Soles), the prosecutor may recommend a reduction in sentence. For instance, in similar cases, cooperation could influence the final sentence, although they initially face harsh penalties.
Cooperation Agreement (Plea Deal): An agreement with the prosecution may include a reduction of charges or a lighter sentence in exchange for testifying against other defendants. This has been observed in high-profile cases.
Witness Protection Program: If cooperation puts the defendant at risk, they may access this program, which includes a new identity and relocation, although this does not directly reduce the sentence.
Limiting Factors: However, benefits are not guaranteed. The severity of the crime (drug terrorism involves terrorism and large-scale drug trafficking), the quality of the information, and the discretion of the judge are crucial. Cases like Genaro García Luna, sentenced to 38 years in 2024, show that even with limited cooperation, penalties can be severe if the damage caused is deemed extreme.
In summary, cooperation may offer opportunities for sentence reduction or protection, but it depends on the usefulness of the information and the willingness of the prosecution and the judge. Each case is evaluated individually, and defendants must demonstrate a genuine commitment to justice.