Score:   0.9237
Docket Number:   SD-TX  5:18-cr-00589
Case Name:   USA v. Quinones-Velazquez
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PQJ90VDT_wf-trDH8fTcYEsoj4iEomZjNYGLDBeUXYc/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2019-10-17 07:47:21 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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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
Magistrate Docket Number:   SD-TX  5:18-mj-00697
Case Name:   USA v. Quinones-Velazquez
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gQmGAvPWQUJUnGp1IkRVxVyzCyuCxq8SnZHQuIn9cNc/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2019-10-17 06:30:55 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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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
Score:   0.9237
Docket Number:   SD-TX  4:18-cr-00271
Case Name:   USA v. Quinonez
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fTqfcV3xalXe1Xt2jzm5p0MUaU0Tzp7dpBrfkxMjk5A/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2019-10-17 02:44:49 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
Score:   0.8474
Docket Number:   SD-TX  1:17-cr-00737
Case Name:   USA v. Cisneros-Quinones
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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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 number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

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

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

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
Magistrate Docket Number:   SD-TX  1:17-mj-00817
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: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
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 docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

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 number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

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

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

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
Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – A 33-year-old resident of the Bronx, New York, has been ordered to federal prison following his convictions of wire and mail fraud, announced U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson. A federal jury convicted Christopher Donrick Daley Sept. 21, 2016, following a  two-day trial.

 

Today, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, who presided over the trial, handed Daley a total sentence of 120 months in prison. He was further ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $614,950 and will serve three years of supervised release following completion of the prison term. In handing down the sentence, the court noted that Daley tried to appear as a family man when he ate with his victims. “You actually sat down with their children when you knew you were stealing them blind,” Hughes said.

 

Daley devised a scheme to defraud investors by falsely representing he operated a commodity pool which invested in oil futures contracts which would pay investors return of at least 20% per month and had never had a losing month. The evidence at trial showed that Daley received more than $1.4 million in investor funds, but he only invested approximately $195,000.

 

Daley lost all the investors funds he did invest.

 

The evidence also proved that Daley emailed monthly statements to his investors showing significant monthly returns when there were none. Daley also used money from the investor funds to purchase a new BMW and Range Rover.

 

Judge Hughes ordered Daley into custody immediately after the verdict was returned where he will remain pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

 

The FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys John Braddock and Charles Escher prosecuted the case.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON - Three people, including two former officers, are now in custody in relation to the fatal events that occurred in January 2019 on Harding Street in Houston, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick along with Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI.

A federal grand jury returned the nine-count indictment Nov. 14 against Gerald M. Goines, 55, and Steven M. Bryant, 46, both former Houston Police Department (HPD) officers. Also charged is Patricia Ann Garcia, 53. All are residents of Houston. The indictment was unsealed this morning as authorities took all three into custody. They are expected to make their initial appearances before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena H. Palermo at 2 .m. today.

The federal indictment stems from the Jan. 28 narcotics raid HPD conducted on the 7800 block of Harding Street in Houston. The enforcement action resulted in the deaths of two residents at that location. 

Goines is charged with two counts of depriving the victims’ constitutional right to be secure against unreasonable searches. The indictment alleges Goines made numerous materially false statements in the state search warrant he obtained for their residence. The execution of that warrant containing these false statements resulted in the death of the two individuals as well as injuries to four other persons, according to the indictment.

Goines and Bryant are charged with obstructing justice by falsifying records. Goines allegedly made several false statements in his tactical plan and offense report prepared in connection with that search warrant. The indictment alleges Bryant falsely claimed in a supplemental case report he had previously assisted Goines in the Harding Street investigation. Bryant allegedly identified a brown powdery substance (heroin) he retrieved from Goines’ vehicle as narcotics purchased from the Harding Street residence Jan. 27.

Goines is further charged with three separate counts of obstructing an official proceeding. The federal grand jury alleged Goines falsely stated Jan. 30 that someone had purchased narcotics at the Harding Street location three days prior. He  also falsely stated Jan. 31 that another individual purchased narcotics at that residence that day, according to the charges. On Feb. 13, he also falsely claimed he had purchased narcotics at that residence on that day. The indictment alleges none of these statements were true.

The charges against Garcia allege she conveyed false information by making several fake 911 calls. Specifically, on Jan. 8, she allegedly made several calls claiming her daughter was inside the Harding Street location. According to the indictment, Garcia added that the residents of the home were addicts and drug dealers and that they had guns – including machine guns – inside the home, according to the indictment. The charges allege none of Garcia’s claims were true.

If convicted of the civil rights charges, Goines faces up to life in prison. Each obstruction count carries a potential 20-year sentence, while Garcia faces a five-year term of imprisonment for conveying false information.

The FBI is conducting the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Alamdar S. Hamdani, Arthur R. Jones and Sharad S. Khandelwal are prosecuting the case along with Special Litigation Counsel Jared Fishman of the department’s Civil Rights Division. 

An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence. 

A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas - Sea World Management & Trading Inc. and Edmon Fajardo were convicted today for maintaining false and incomplete records relating to the discharge of oil and garbage from an oil tanker that was operating off the coast of Texas, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick and Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood.

Sea World Management & Trading Inc. is a tank vessel operating company, and Fajardo is the master of the tank vessel Sea Faith. Both admitted that oil cargo residues and machinery space bilge water were illegally dumped from the Sea Faith directly into the ocean while the vessel was transiting to Corpus Christi without the use of required pollution prevention equipment. They also admitted that these discharges were not recorded in the vessel’s Oil Record Book as required. Specifically, on five different occasions between March 10, 2017, and March 18, 2017, Fajardo ordered crew members to illegally discharge oily waste from various locations of the vessel’s cargo/deck spaces. These oily waste discharges bypassed the use of the vessel’s required oil discharge monitoring equipment and were done while the vessel was in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico.

Sea World Management & Trading Inc. and Fajardo further admitted that on March 10, 2017, and March 15, 2017, Fajardo ordered crew members to throw plastics, empty steel drums, oily rags, batteries and empty paint cans directly overboard into the ocean. None of these garbage discharges were recorded as required in the vessel’s Garbage Record Book. 

Sea World Management & Trading Inc. and Fajardo pleaded guilty to two felony violations of the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships for failing to accurately maintain the Sea Faith’s Oil Record Book and Garbage Record Book. Under the terms of the plea agreement, the company will pay a total fine of $2.25 million and serve a three-year term of probation during which all vessels the company operated and calling on U.S. ports will be required to implement a robust Environmental Compliance Plan. Fajardo was also sentenced today to six months in prison to be followed by two years of supervised release. He was also ordered to pay a $2,000 fine. 

The U.S. Coast Guard Corpus Christi Sector, U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service and Environmental Protection Agency-Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney-In-Charge Julie K. Hampton and Trial Attorney Stephen Da Ponte of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Department of Justice prosecuted the case.

Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   SD-TX  2:19-cr-01938
Case Name:   USA v. Hernandez
  Press Releases:
LAREDO, Texas – Three persons alleged to have been involved in engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license have made their initial appearances in federal court, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick along with Special Agent in Charge Fred Milanowski of the  Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and Special Agent in Charge Shane Folden, of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

Authorities arrested Alejandro Rodriguez, 26, Alejandro Hernandez, 27, and Lewis Rodriguez, 28, all of Laredo, Thursday, April 12. Today, they made their appearance in Laredo federal court. They are set for a preliminary examination hearing on April 20, at 10:00 a.m. before U.S. Magistrate Judge Diana Song Quiroga.

According to the criminal complaint, on four separate occasions, federal agents purchased 11 AR-type rifles from the three men. Last week, agents seized another 12 AR-type rifles as part of an undercover operation. The charges allege two of those weapons were fully automatic firearms. None of the firearms had any identifying markings or serial numbers, according to the complaint.  

“ATF targets firearms smuggling organizations, because stopping the flow of weapons illegally exported from the United States is a top priority," said Milanowski. “These offenders and their networks must be dismantled, as they remain a serious threat here in the United States.” 

“Stopping the flow of weapons illegally exported into Mexico is an urgent priority for HSI,” said Folden. “HSI along with its federal partners will continue to target firearms smuggling organizations and dismantle the networks responsible for supplying these egregious offenders before they fall into the hands of drug cartels which pose a threat here in the United States and abroad.”

If convicted, each faces up to five years imprisonment and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.

ATF and HSI are conducting the investigation with the assistance of Border Patrol, U.S. Marshals Service and the Laredo Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorney Giselle S. Guerra is prosecuting the case. 

 A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law. 

###

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – Three people have been ordered to federal prison following their convictions of money laundering for their participation in a Houston-based bank fraud and money laundering scheme, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez.  

 

Houston resident Jason Ryan Hall, 36, pleaded guilty Aug. 15, 2016, while disbarred former attorney Howard Price Johnson, 63, from Salt Lake City, Utah, and Ohio resident Anissa Lavon Burdett, 50, pleaded guilty Sept. 29, and 23, 2016, respectively. 

 

Today, U.S. District Judge Alfred Bennett ordered Hall to serve an 18-month sentence to be immediately followed by two years of supervised release. Johnson was previously sentenced to a term of 12 months and a day, while Burdett was ordered to serve six months in prison. At the hearing today, additional evidence was presented about Hall’s role in orchestrating the scheme. He was further ordered to pay restitution to the victim banks of $484,070.76 and forfeit $21,000 to the United States.

 

The three individuals participated in an automobile loan fraud scheme centered in Houston spanning April through November 2011. Hall held himself out as a used car dealer who sold luxury vehicles through his alleged Houston car dealerships “EZ Auto Group” and “1st Choice Motors.” Hall’s alleged dealerships, however, existed only as websites that Hall created. They had no physical existence, owned no cars and made no actual auto sales. 

 

Acting as “straw buyers,” Johnson, Burdett and others applied to lenders for auto loans in order to purchase used Mercedes and Lexis cars from Hall’s supposed dealerships. In reality, no vehicles were purchased and Hall had none to sell. In their auto loan applications, the straw buyers made multiple misrepresentations to prospective lenders and submitted fraudulent documents Hall created and supplied in support of the loan applications. These fraudulent documents included fake bills of sale of the cars that were the subject of the loans and fake W-2 forms that purported to show gainful employment by the straw buyers that would qualify them for the loans. 

 

Once the auto loans funded and the funds had been deposited into the bank accounts of the alleged dealerships, Hall kicked-back a portion of the loan funds to the straw buyers. Hall delivered no vehicles to the straw buyers and delivered no vehicle titles to the lenders. The straw buyers failed to pay off their loans, causing the loans to go into default. During the scheme, straw buyers applied for a total of 16 fraudulent auto loans with a combined value of approximately $695,741.

 

Hall was permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

 

IRS-Criminal Investigation and U.S. Secret Service investigated. Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert S. Johnson prosecuted the case.

 

Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   SD-TX  6:17-cr-00091
Case Name:   USA v. Carson
  Press Releases:
VICTORIA, Texas – A 48-year-old Victoria man has been ordered to federal prison following his convictions on 10 counts of wire fraud, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick. Murray Wade Carson pleaded guilty July 2, 2018.

Today, Senior U.S. District Judge John Rainey handed Carson a 27-month sentence to be immediately followed by three years of supervised release. At the hearing, additional testimony was provided that described how Carson used sophisticated means to cimmit is fraud. In handing down the sentence, the court noted that it was incredible that the crime went on for eight years until an auditor figured it out. “That was the only thing that stopped you,” said Rainey. 

At the time of his plea, Carson admitted he devised a scheme to defraud his employer by charging his employer for the purchase non-existent goods and products from the Kirby Taylor Company (KTC). Carson had set up KTC and concealed that information from his employer.

Carson admitted he submitted invoices from KTC for nonexistent goods, which he purchased using his employer issued credit card. He then used his home computer to submit charges for these nonexistent goods.

The scheme lasted from approximately 2007 through June 2015.  

Carson was permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.  

The FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Braddock is prosecuting the case.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/142hgKeoden-1fHHtwAgU_1_yHOwSYt9VLosezwQCisM/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2019-10-16 22:30:05 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
Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Three people are now in custody in relation to the fatal raid that occurred in January 2019 on Harding Street in Houston, Texas, announced Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick for the Southern District of Texas and Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI.

A federal grand jury returned the nine count indictment Nov. 14 against Gerald M. Goines, 55, and Steven M. Bryant, 46, both former Houston Police Department (HPD) officers. Also charged is Patricia Ann Garcia, 53. All are residents of Houston. The indictment was unsealed this morning as authorities took all three into custody. They are expected to make their initial appearances before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena H. Palermo at 2 p.m. central time.

The federal indictment stems from the Jan. 28 narcotics raid HPD conducted on the 7800 block of Harding Street in Houston. The enforcement action resulted in the deaths of two residents at that location. 

Goines is charged with two counts of depriving the victims’ constitutional right to be secure against unreasonable searches. The indictment alleges Goines made numerous materially false statements in the state search warrant he obtained for their residence. The execution of that warrant containing these false statements resulted in the death of the two individuals as well as injuries to four other persons, according to the indictment.

Goines and Bryant are charged with obstructing justice by falsifying records. Goines allegedly made several false statements in his tactical plan and offense report prepared in connection with that search warrant. The indictment alleges Bryant falsely claimed in a supplemental case report he had previously assisted Goines in the Harding Street investigation. Bryant allegedly identified a brown powdery substance (heroin) he retrieved from Goines’ vehicle as narcotics purchased from the Harding Street residence Jan. 27.

Goines is further charged with three separate counts of obstructing an official proceeding. The federal grand jury alleges Goines falsely stated Jan. 30 that a particular confidential informant had purchased narcotics at the Harding Street location three days prior. He also falsely stated Jan. 31 that a different confidential informant purchased narcotics at that residence that day, according to the charges. On Feb. 13, he also falsely claimed he had purchased narcotics at that residence on that day. The indictment alleges none of these statements were true.

The charges against Garcia allege she conveyed false information by making several fake 911 calls. Specifically, on Jan. 8, she allegedly made several calls claiming her daughter was inside the Harding Street location. According to the indictment, Garcia added that the residents of the home were addicts and drug dealers and that they had guns – including machine guns – inside the home. The charges allege none of Garcia’s claims were true.

If convicted of the civil rights charges, Goines faces up to life in prison. Each obstruction count carries a potential 20-year sentence, while Garcia faces a five-year term of imprisonment for conveying false information.

The FBI is conducting the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Alamdar S. Hamdani, Arthur R. Jones and Sharad S. Khandelwal, and Special Litigation Counsel Jared Fishman of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, are prosecuting the case. 

An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence. A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – A former trustee with Houston Community College (HCC) has been ordered to federal prison following his conviction of bribery of a public official concerning programs receiving federal funds, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick and Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI. Chris Oliver, 53, of Houston, pleaded guilty May 15, 2017.

 

Today, U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore, who accepted the guilty plea, handed Oliver a 70-month sentence. At the hearing, additional testimony was presented including the fact that Oliver had maintained a position of trust as an elected official, but nonetheless, chose to engage in this criminal activity. It was also noted that the bribes took place over an extended period of time, beginning in 2009 and continuing through 2016. Oliver was further ordered to pay a $12,000 in forfeiture to the FBI and will be required to serve a one-year-term of supervised release following completion of the prison term. In handing down the sentence, Judge Gilmore noted that Oliver had been on the board of trustees for approximately 21 years and that the sentence was necessary to take into account the number and amount of bribes Oliver had received, to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law and provide adequate deterrence.

 

“Public officials who use their position for private gain undermine the integrity of government and erode the public's trust in the very framework of our democracy. Today's sentence sends a strong message of the consequences of such actions,” said Turner. “The FBI stands firm with local, state and federal partners in an unwavering commitment to combat public corruption and hold accountable those who choose to abuse the privilege of serving the American people. We rely heavily on the public's help in investigating these crimes and urge anyone with information related to public corruption to report it to the FBI.”

 

At the time of his guilty plea, Oliver admitted he accepted bribes in exchange for the promise of official actions related to his duties as a member of the HCC board of trustees. It was revealed in open court at the plea hearing that Oliver met with another individual on several occasions at various restaurants and coffee shops in Houston where he accepted cash payments in exchange for promising to use his position to help that person secure contracts with HCC.  

 

Oliver later resigned from his position

 

Oliver was permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

 

The FBI conducted the investigation with assistance from the Department of Education - Office of Inspector General. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Andrew Leuchtmann and Julie Searle are prosecuting the case.

 

If you have information regarding public corruption in the Houston area, please contact the FBI helpline at 713-693-5000.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – The 75-year-old long time fugitive known as “Butch” Ballow has received a second federal sentence following his admission of defrauding investors in a Nevada company with shares traded on the over-the-counter securities market, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick. Harris Dempsey aka “Butch” Ballow, formerly of formerly of Galveston County, pleaded guilty Feb. 2, 2018, to wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.   

Today, U.S. District Judge Ewing Werlein Jr. sentenced Ballow to serve 40 years in prison – the statutory maximum. He was further ordered to pay $37,544,944 in restitution. At the hearing, the court heard from one victim whom Ballow defrauded out of $5 million. The victim explained that Ballow used religious pretenses to convince victims to invest money and that he presented himself in Mexico as a type of missionary. He further mentioned that he knew victims who had lost their life saving to Ballow.

Judge Werlein added that in all his decades on the bench, he could not think of a more outrageous fraudulent crime spree, calling it “despicable” and noting there were more than 500 victims.

Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) John Lewis told the judge Ballow was a “financial predator” who would keep committing fraud as long as he was out of jail and explained Ballow had been using fake names to commit fraud since at least the early 1980s when he was convicted of a financial crime against a jewelry store in San Diego.

In this case, Ballow admitted to defrauding investors in E-SOL International Corporation.   

At the time of the offense, Ballow was a fugitive from justice in the United States. He had previously been convicted of money laundering that centered on misrepresentations made in connection with the purchase and sale of stock. Ballow pleaded guilty in that case before U.S. District Judge David Hittner and was released on bond. He was set for sentencing Dec. 16, 2004, but failed to show, having fled the country for Mexico where he lived for almost five years under a series of fake names. While there, he defrauded numerous investors through a new scheme which is the basis for the sentencing today.

At the time of his plea, Ballow admitted that in 2005, while living as a fugitive in Mexico under the name John Gel, he purchased the majority of the publically traded shares of E-SOL and installed fictitious persons named Robert Remington and Marilyn Desimone as officers. At the time, E-SOL had almost no assets and conducted no business. Nonetheless, over the course of the next four years, Ballow sold E-SOL stock to investors in return for millions of dollars by deceiving them about the company’s assets and finances, while hiding his identity, his criminal convictions and his status as a fugitive.

In June 2008, Ballow pretended to be a banker named Tom Brown and convinced an American investor living in Puerto Aventuras, Mexico, to purchase E-SOL stock for $5 million. Ballow convinced the investor that E-SOL was developing a golf and recreational resort community in the jungle west of Cancun. However, the resort was fictitious and the stock was worthless. Ballow soon fled from Puerto Aventuras and surfaced under a new name a few months later in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, where he continued to defraud investors.

Ballow was ultimately arrested by Mexican authorities July 13, 2010, in Nuevo Vallarta, Mexico, and extradited to the United States the following year.

Once in the United States, Judge Hittner ordered him to prison for 10 years in prison and to pay $10 million in restitution for the 2003 money laundering conviction.

Several other persons have been convicted of conspiring to commit wire fraud with Ballow while he was in Mexico and ordered to federal prison including Austin lawyer Patrick Lanier, 69, and Christopher Harless, 65, of Georgetown, who are currently serving a 17 and 20 years in federal prison, respectively. Other co-conspirators are awaiting sentencing or remain fugitives in the case.

The FBI and IRS - Criminal Investigation conducted the investigation with the assistance of the U.S. Marshals Service and U.S. Postal Inspection Service. The United States government also received extensive and valuable assistance from the governments of Mexico and Canada.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys John R. Lewis and Belinda Beek are prosecuting the case.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – Another person has been ordered to federal prison in relation to a $23 million nonexistent commercial accounts receivable scheme, announced U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson along with Special Agent in Charge Rick Goss of IRS-Criminal Investigation (CI).

 

Stefano Guido Vitale, 40, of Scottsdale, Arizona, pleaded guilty March 21, 2016. Co-defendants Alan Leschyshyn, 53, of Cave Creek, Arizona; Bree Ann Davis, 40, of Lakewood, Colorado, and Tammie Roth Hanania, 59, and Edward Peter Hanania, 64, both of Folsom, California, all had previously entered their respective guilty pleas. All were convicted of conspiring to engage a scheme to defraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Vitale and Leschyshyn were also convicted of eight additional counts of wire fraud.

 

Today, U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore sentenced Vitale to serve a total of 262 months in federal prison immediately followed by three years of supervised release. The court also ordered he pay restitution of $6,177,069.11.

 

In November 2016, Leschyshyn was ordered to serve 235 months followed by five years of supervised release. Tammie and Edward Hanania were ordered to serve 12 months and one day in prison and two years of supervised release. Davis will be sentenced later this month.

 

The scheme produced approximately $6.4 million in fraudulently obtained proceeds which the defendants agreed to launder through various bank accounts. They executed the scheme to defraud by using and establishing various business entities to sell, at a discount, nonexistent commercial accounts receivable. The defendants would approach factoring companies as sellers of customized gaming vault bundles and present fabricated invoices as evidence the defendants were owed a certain amount of money for goods provided to another one of their business entities. To establish creditworthiness of these companies and to convince the factoring company the credit risk was minimal, the defendants fabricated and/or altered documents and provided them to the factoring company.

 

The fraud conspiracy also proved that Vitale and Leschyshyn defrauded BOKF, NA, doing business as Bank of Arizona, when they applied for and received a $1 million line of credit secured by the Export Import Bank of the United States.

 

Vitale will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

 

IRS-CI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Melissa Annis is prosecuting the case.

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