Yes, of course the DOJ can bring new charges against him and gett an indictment. My point was only that a violation of probation (VOP) is unlikely because of the proximity of the end of his probation period next month.
And if he's CONvicted of new charges, his prior CONvictions and criminal history will count in the sentencing guidelines calculation and the judge will also have discretion for an upward departure if the fact that the crimes were committed during a probation period.
He may also have lied/withheld information from his probation officer which would be a separate count (18 USC 1001) worth up to 5 years. Butt as we know this would generally run CONcurrently so is of little practical additive effect.
However, a judge has the ability to incorporate these additional matters in her/his overall decision. For example, with GECC's Jim Bolt, his prior convictions were ~OUTTside the 10 year lookback period for criminal history in the sentencing guidelines. However, the judge sentenced him with a massive upward departure to a 10 year sentence because the judge took judicial notice of his 1980's CONvictions and deemed him an ongoing threat to recommit as a career criminole. I don't recall the exact guidelines calculation for Bolt, butt I think it would have been around 4 years or so, so the judge really made a very significant upward departure to gett to 10 years.
And your point about the DOJ using the SEC case to discover additional evidence upon which to base charges is spot on. As you know, in some situations the SEC and the DOJ rely on evidence that is uncovered by private litigation, such as shareholder class actions or criminal v. criminal private lawsuits (the recent Barry Honig action against MGT - we'll see if that bears any fruit).
My comments were narrowly directed to the VOP issue, nott a statement that the miscreant probationer is free of future criminole prosecution/persecution/perversion.
AI
