Executive Summary
- Sentencing for Wrackkie Quiogue is delayed until March 25.
- Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of an unregistered destructive device.
- Incident involved a Molotov cocktail near federal buildings in Los Angeles.
- Authorities warn of severe penalties for violence during protests.
A sentencing hearing has been delayed for a Long Beach man who admitted to possessing a Molotov cocktail during protests in downtown Los Angeles centered on immigration enforcement. The hearing for Wrackkie Quiogue, 28, originally set for this week, was rescheduled Wednesday and is now set for March 25, according to court filings.
Quiogue pleaded guilty in November to one federal count of possession of an unregistered destructive device. The charge carries a potential sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The charges stem from an incident on June 8, where Quiogue was identified by law enforcement possessing the handmade explosive near federal buildings.
According to an affidavit filed with the charge, Los Angeles Police Department officers observed Quiogue holding the device and a lighter. Authorities state that upon being spotted, Quiogue attempted to flee the scene and threw the weapon before being apprehended. The device was identified as a Molotov cocktail, an incendiary weapon typically consisting of a bottle filled with flammable liquid and a cloth fuse.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli addressed the public safety implications in a statement following the charges. "When protesting crosses the line into violence, the penalties will be severe," Essayli said, adding that such attacks could result in "life-altering or life-ending injuries to police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and innocent bystanders."
Judicial Proceedings and Legal Standards
The postponement of the sentencing phase allows for further procedural preparation in a case that underscores the strict federal penalties associated with unregistered destructive devices. In federal jurisprudence, sentencing for such offenses often weighs the potential for mass casualty or significant property damage against the defendant’s history and plea agreement. The case remains a focal point for law enforcement emphasizing the distinction between protected speech and acts of violence during civil unrest.
It is important to note that under the U.S. legal system, all individuals charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
