Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-DC  1:19-cr-00165
Case Name:   USA v. TUCKER
  Press Releases:
            WASHINGTON – Four individuals were arrested yesterday on federal indictments alleging that they participated in corruption and fraud schemes centered at the District of Columbia’s Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR). 

            Last week, a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned a sealed indictment alleging that Vincent Slater, 41, of Temple Hills, MD, the former supervisor of OTR’s Compliance Administration Adjustment Unit; Anthony Merritt, 44, of Washington, D.C., a former employee of the District of Columbia Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA); and Andre de Moya, 46, of Brookeville, MD, a District business owner, conspired to fraudulently reduce the tax liabilities of de Moya’s businesses by paying bribes to Slater. The indictment also alleges that two other District business owners, Chao Charles Zhou, 46, and Arman Amirshahi, 48, both of Maryland, participated in the conspiracy. 

            According to the indictment, Slater brokered bribery agreements with de Moya, Zhou, and Amirshahi through Merritt, whom Slater relied upon to communicate with the business owners and to collect bribe payments. The indictment alleges that Slater used his position at OTR to fraudulently eliminate tax liabilities of businesses owned by de Moya, Zhou, and Amirshahi.  According to the indictment, Slater caused fraudulent tax adjustments to be entered into the computer database used by OTR to manage taxpayer accounts.  These adjustments resulted in the granting of waivers and abatements for which the businesses were ineligible under OTR policies and procedures, as well as the creation of false tax credits that the indictment alleges Slater to have caused to be applied against the businesses’ current liabilities.  The indictment further alleges that Slater settled the tax liabilities of at least one business by creating a fraudulent Offer in Compromise agreement, in which he falsely identified himself as a supervisor in the Collection Division, because he was not authorized to issue such an agreement in his role in the Adjustment Unit.  Finally, the indictment alleges that Slater used his official position and knowledge of District tax laws to take measures to help co-conspirators unlawfully evade taxes without consequence. 

            In a separate indictment, also returned under seal by a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia last week, Bobby Tucker, 63, of Suffolk, Virginia, is alleged to have paid bribes to an OTR official in order to reduce the tax liabilities of a business he consulted and to take other actions to benefit Tucker’s business interests as opportunities arose.  The indictment alleges that Tucker agreed to pay an OTR official, who was working as a confidential source, to obtain referrals of city taxpayers with outstanding tax liabilities.  According to the indictment, Tucker would then attempt to broker a bribery agreement whereby he would be paid by a business owner to facilitate a bribe to the OTR official to fraudulently reduce or eliminate tax liabilities. 

            Slater, Merritt, and de Moya were arrested Wednesday in the Metropolitan Area and presented to U.S. Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.  All three defendants were released on personal recognizance.  They are each charged with one count of Conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; Slater and de Moya are each charged with one count of Bribery, and Merritt is charged with two counts of Bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201; and all three defendants are charged with six counts of Money, Property, and Honest Services Wire Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1346. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, who scheduled an initial status conference for De Moya, Merritt, and Slater on May 29, 2019.

            Tucker was arrested on Wednesday in Suffolk, VA, and presented to U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division.  He was released on personal recognizance.  Tucker is charged with one count of Bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201.  Tucker’s case is assigned to Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The next court date is May 31.

            The charges in an indictment are merely allegations and every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  The statutory maximum penalty for Conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, is five years; for Bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201, the statutory maximum penalty is 15 years; and for Money, Property, and Honest Services Wire Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1346, the statutory maximum penalty is 20 years. 

            These cases are being investigated by the FBI's Washinigton Field Office and the District of Columbia Office of Inspector General, with the assistance of the District of Columbia Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of Integrity and Oversight.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Emily Miller, Molly Gaston, and Peter Lallas of the Fraud and Public Corruption Section are prosecuting the cases.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Hz8pSXqnZZKlOHCyf7uhObKxx0xSywvE5yX8eAxIXP8
  Last Updated: 2024-04-11 10:30:14 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E