Court Orders Defendants to Stop Operating Website Selling Unlawful Bleach Product for Coronavirus Treatment
MIAMI, Fl. – Today, a federal judge in South Florida entered a temporary injunction halting the sale of an unapproved, unproven, and potentially dangerous coronavirus (COVID-19) treatment product, announced Ariana Fajardo Orshan, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida.
The civil complaint and accompanying court papers filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida allege that the defendants, Genesis II Church of Health and Healing (Genesis) and its principals, Mark Grenon, Joseph Grenon, Jordan Grenon, and Jonathan Grenon sell and distribute a product called Miracle Mineral Solution, also referred to as MMS. Genesis sells MMS through its websites claiming that it will cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent Coronavirus, which includes COVID-19, as well as other diseases including Alzheimer’s, autism, brain cancer, HIV/AIDS, and multiple sclerosis, among others. MMS is a chemical product which, when combined with the included activator, creates a powerful bleach product that the defendants market for oral ingestion. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has previously issued public warnings to consumers that MMS can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and symptoms of severe dehydration. The Justice Department sought emergency and preliminary relief from the court.
“We will zealously pursue perpetrators of fraud schemes seeking to take advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Ariana Fajardo Orshan, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. “Not only arethese products potentially harmful, but their distribution and use may prevent those who aresick from receiving the legitimate healthcare they need.”
“The Department of Justice will take swift action to protect consumers from illegal and potentially harmful products being offered to treat COVID-19,” said Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt. “We will continue to work closely alongside our partners at the Food and Drug Administration to quickly shut down those selling illegal products during this pandemic.”
The complaint alleges that defendants’ disease-related treatment claims are unsupported by any well-controlled clinical studies or other credible scientific substantiation. Additionally, the complaint asserts that MMS’s labeling is false and misleading and that since defendants make disease-related treatment claims about MMS in the absence of any clinical data, the products are misbranded.
On April 8, 2020, FDA, jointly with the Federal Trade Commission, issued a Warning Letter to Defendants notifying them that they are violating federal law (both the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as well as the Federal Trade Commission Act) by, among other things, distributing unapproved new drugs and misbranded drugs in interstate commerce. Despite this warning, the complaint alleges, the defendants not only continue to sell MMS with claims that it cures, mitigates, treats, or prevents Coronavirus, which includes COVID-19, but they have also expressly stated that they will not take corrective action.
“Americans expect and deserve proven medical treatments and today’s action is a forceful reminder that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will use its legal authorities to quickly stop those who have proven to continuously threaten the health of the American public. It is vital that sellers of drug products comply with the FD&C Act and do not sell products with false and misleading claims, especially to treat COVID-19 and other debilitating diseases, such as autism and Alzheimer’s disease,” said FDA Commissioner Stephen M. Hahn, M.D. “Despite a previous warning, the Genesis II Church of Healing has continued to actively place consumers at risk by peddling potentially dangerous and unapproved chlorine dioxide products. We will not stand for this, and the FDA remains fully committed to taking strong enforcement action against any sellers who place unsuspecting American consumers at risk by offering their unproven products to treat serious diseases.”
FDA’s previous warning to consumers about the dangers of MMS can be found here: https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/danger-dont-drink-miracle-mineral-solution-or-similar-products.
The enforcement action filed today is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Matthew Feeley of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, and Senior Litigation Counsel Ross S. Goldstein and David A. Frank from the Department of Justice, Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch. Assisting with the enforcement action is Associate Chief Counsel for Enforcement Joshua Davenport of the FDA, Office of General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services.
The claims made in the complaint are allegations that, if the case were to proceed to trial, the government must prove to receive a permanent injunction against the defendants.
Additional information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts may be found at www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, visit its website at www.justice.gov/usao-sdfl. For information about the Department of Justice’s efforts to stop illegal COVID-19-related activity, visit www.justice.gov/coronavirus. For the most up-to-date information on COVID-19, consumers may visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and WHO websites.
CONCORD - John William McMahon, 30, of Hampton, pleaded guilty in federal court to distribution of child pornography, United States Attorney Scott W. Murray announced today.
According to court documents and statements made in court, during an ongoing undercover investigation, a member of the New Hampshire Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force accessed a peer-to-peer network to identify users who may be sharing images of child pornography. On various dates between December 14, 2017, and January 2, 2018, law enforcement officers conducted single-source downloads of child pornography from a certain I.P. address. Agents identified the address used to distribute child pornography images during the undercover sessions.
Through their investigation, agents identified the defendant, John William McMahon, as the person responsible for distributing child pornography images during the undercover sessions. In a consensual interview, the defendant admitted accessing wireless internet belonging to a neighboring apartment, and he further admitted downloading child pornography. Investigators later obtained a search warrant for McMahon’s laptop and other electronic media recovered from him. Subsequent forensic examination revealed approximately 1,410 images of suspected child pornography on McMahon’s laptop. The child pornography images and videos were sent to the National Center for Mission and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which confirmed that 500 still images and 6 videos were of identified child victims.
McMahon’s sentencing date has not yet been scheduled.
“Child pornography crimes involve the distribution of images of children who have been the victims of terrible abuse,” said U.S. Attorney Murray. “Those who distribute these images are committing a serious federal crime and will be prosecuted aggressively. I am grateful for the efforts of the law enforcement officers whose dedicated work led to this successful prosecution.”
“Every conviction of an individual who distributes child pornography is a victory in our fight against the sharing of thesesickening images,” said Michael Shea, acting Special Agent in Charge, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Boston. “We applaud the tireless work of our partners in the New Hampshire Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and the U.S. Attorney for New Hampshire for their commitment to fighting for justice for the victims of these disturbing crimes.”
This matter was investigated by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations and the New Hampshire Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Cam Le.
In February 2006, the Department of Justice introduced Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative designed to protect children from online exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorney’s Offices, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
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
Two criminal complaints were unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging three correction officers employed by the New York City Department of Correction (DOC) at Rikers Island with federal program fraud. Correction Officers Steven Cange, Monica Coaxum and Eduardo Trinidad were arrested earlier today, and their initial appearances are scheduled for this afternoon before United States Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon.
Breon Peace, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Michael J. Driscoll, Assistant Director-in-Charge, New York Field Office (FBI), and Jocelyn E. Strauber, Commissioner, New York City Department of Investigation (DOI) announced the charges.
“As alleged, in the midst of an ongoing staffing crisis at Rikers Island, the defendants defrauded New Yorkers by fraudulently obtaining their full salaries while taking over a year of sick leave. These correction officers abandoned their oath to protect inmates and put the safety of their fellow correction officers at risk” stated United States Attorney Breon Peace. “Today’s arrests demonstrate that this Office remains committed to rooting out corruption at Rikers Island and protecting New Yorkers from public officials who steal their tax dollars.”
“As alleged, the defendants deliberately violated their oath when they participated in an elaborate scheme to defraud our community. The FBI and our partners are committed to disrupting these fraudulent scams and holding the public officials who perpetuate them accountable,” stated FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge Driscoll.
DOI Commissioner Jocelyn E. Strauber said, “As charged, these New York City Correction Officers feigned illness and submitted false medical documentation to take sick leave during a staffing crisis, defrauding the City of New York of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Today’s arrests hold these Correction Officers accountable for the shameful dereliction of duty alleged in the Complaints. I thank the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for their continuing partnership and efforts to bring to justice those whose misconduct jeopardizes the safety and stability of the City’s jails.”
As alleged in one complaint, New York City Correction Officer Steven Cange fraudulently obtained more than $160,000 in salary by being on sick leave from March 2021 to the present. Although Cange claimed that he suffered from symptoms of vertigo and side effects from the COVID-19 vaccine, evidence obtained by law enforcement demonstrates that Cange was able to work. During his sick leave, Cange submitted more than 100 fraudulent medical notes to DOC demonstrating that he was at physical therapy or another medical provider when records subpoenaed from those providers demonstrate that Cange was not at those appointments. Law enforcement also observed Cange engaging in normal life activities with no apparent difficulty.
As alleged in a separate complaint, New York City Correction Officer Monica Coaxum fraudulently obtained more than $80,000 in salary by being on sick leave from March 2021 to May 2022, and her fiancée, Correction Officer Eduardo Trinidad, fraudulently obtained more than $140,000 in salary by being on sick leave from June 2021 to November 2022. Although Coaxum claimed to suffer from multiple injuries, evidence collected by investigators shows that she was able to work. During her sick leave, Coaxum submitted nearly 50 fraudulent medical notes to DOC stating that she had gone to a medical appointment at times law enforcement determined she was elsewhere. Additionally, evidence shows that on some occasions where Coaxum claimed to be injured and at home, she was traveling and at parties. When approached by law enforcement, Coaxum admitted to forging some medical documents.
Trinidad likewise obtained more than $140,000 by claiming to be too injured to work for over a year. Although he went to medical appointments with DOC wearing some combination of a sling, cane, and/or boot, photographic and video evidence during the same period showed Trinidad doing normal life activities like home improvement work, bowling and traveling abroad, without any difficulty or help from equipment like a boot, sling or cane.
The charges in the complaints are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment.
The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Public Integrity Section. The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Philip Pilmar and Andrew Grubin.
CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – Scott D. Tingler, a Morgantown, West Virginia pharmacist, was sentenced today to 121 months incarceration for illegally distributing oxycodone, U.S. Attorney Bill Powell announced.
Tingler, age 41, pled guilty to one count of “Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substances Outside the Bounds of Professional Medical Practice” and one count of “False Tax Return” in May 2019. Tingler admitted to conspiring with others to distribute more than 7,400 grams of oxycodone in Monongalia County and elsewhere from August 2014 to August 2018. Tingler also admitted to filing a false tax return in April 2015, grossly understating his taxable income.
“Too many lives have already been lost in this great state to opioids. We must hold those who are sworn to help the sick and injured accountable when they choose to break their oath and the law. I’ve said it before, but a white coat will not protect you from prosecution if you are illegally peddling pills or other drugs,” said Powell.
Tingler was ordered to pay $507,942.42 in restitution to the IRS and former employees. A money judgement was also made in the amount of $1,845,000.
As a part of the plea agreement, Tingler agreed to relinquish his pharmacy license and not seek to reinstate the same, and agreed to not seek employment in any position that would require or permit him to handle or dispense controlled substances during any period of incarceration or supervised release.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah E. Wagner prosecuted the case on behalf of the government. The Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigative Division, the Drug Enforcement Administration Tactical Diversion Squad, the Morgantown Police Department, the Harrison County Sheriff’s Office and West Virginia State Police BCI investigated.
These charges are the result of investigations supported by the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) under the Attorney General-led Synthetic Opioid Surge (SOS)/Special Operations Division (SOD) Project Clean Sweep. This initiative seeks to reduce the supply of synthetic opioids in “hot spot” areas previously identified by the Attorney General of the United States, thereby reducing drug overdoses and drug overdose deaths, and identify wholesale distribution networks and sources of supply operating nationally and internationally.
Senior U.S. District Judge Irene M. Keeley presided.
CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – Scott D. Tingler, a Morgantown, West Virginia pharmacist, has admitted to illegally distributing oxycodone, United States Attorney Bill Powell announced.
Tingler, age 40, pled guilty to one count of “Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substances Outside the Bounds of Professional Medical Practice” and one count of “False Tax Return.” Tingler admitted to conspiring with others to distribute more than 7,400 grams of oxycodone in Monongalia County and elsewhere from August 2014 to August 2018. Tingler also admitted to filing a false tax return in April 2015, grossly understating his taxable income.
Tingler has agreed to relinquish his pharmacy license and not seek to reinstate the same, and agrees to not seek employment in any position that would require or permit him to handle or dispense controlled substances during any period of incarceration or probation.
Tingler has also agreed to pay 28% of his unreported gross income from tax years 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. He has also agreed to forfeit any property or proceeds from the drug offense in the amount of $1,845,000, as well as a 2016 GMC Sierra 3500HD truck.
Tingler faces up to 20 years incarceration and a fine of up to $1,000,000 for the drug count and faces up to three years incarceration and a fine of up to $250,000 for the tax count. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the actual sentence imposed will be based upon the seriousness of the offenses and the prior criminal history, if any, of the defendant.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah E. Wagner is prosecuting the case on behalf of the government. The Drug Enforcement Administration Tactical Diversion Squad, the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigative Division, the Morgantown Police Department, the West Virginia State Police BCI, and the Harrison County Sheriff's County Sheriff's Office investigated.
These charges are the result of investigations supported by the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) under the Attorney General-led Synthetic Opioid Surge (SOS)/Special Operations Division (SOD) Project Clean Sweep. This initiative seeks to reduce the supply of synthetic opioids in “hot spot” areas previously identified by the Attorney General of the United States, thereby reducing drug overdoses and drug overdose deaths, and identify wholesale distribution networks and sources of supply operating nationally and internationally.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
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
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – A federal judge today sentenced a Tuscaloosa man for sexually exploiting two young children, announced U.S. Attorney Prim F. Escalona and FBI Special Agent in Charge Johnnie Sharp, Jr.
Chief U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler sentenced MATTHEW MILLER, 32, to 7,200 months in prison for producing child pornography. Miller was charged in a 20-count indictment for enticing two children under the age of 5 to engage in sexual explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual production of such conduct. A search warrant was obtained for the defendant’s electronic devices. The forensic examination of those devices revealed 102 pornographic images that the defendant had produced of the children. Miller pled guilty to these charges in October 2019.
“Child predators seek out and victimize those that are the most innocent and vulnerable - children,” Escalona said. “The sentences imposed today and yesterday in local child exploitation cases reflect the commitment of law enforcement in this district to prosecuting to the fullest extent of the law those who commit crimes against children.”
“The crimes for which Miller has admitted guilt are not only disturbing, they aresickening, and his actions robbed these children of their childhood,” Sharp said. “I am proud of the work of the FBI on this case, and I applaud the sentence handed down today, as Miller will spend the rest of his natural life behind prison bars.”
FBI Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force investigated the case, along with the Tuscaloosa County Sheriff’s Office Violent Crime Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorney R. Leann White prosecuted the case.
Assistant U. S. Attorney Valerie Chu (619) 546-6750
SAN DIEGO – A strategically coordinated, six-week nationwide federal law enforcement action has resulted in criminal charges against 138 defendants, including 42 doctors, nurses, and other licensed medical professionals, in 31 federal districts across the United States for their alleged participation in various health care fraud schemes that resulted in approximately $1.4 billion in alleged losses.
The enforcement action includes criminal charges against four defendants here in the Southern District of California, involving more than $129 million in intended losses.
Nationwide, this action includes more than $1.1 billion in fraud committed using telemedicine, more than $29 million in COVID-19 health care fraud, more than $133 million connected to substance abuse treatment facilities, or “sober homes,” and more than $160 million connected to other health care fraud and illegal opioid distribution schemes across the country
"Federal dollars devoted to care for the sick and suffering in our community should not be diverted to line the pockets of greedy opportunists,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Randy Grossman. “Now more than ever, we recognize the importance of our health care system and the important federal programs that care for elderly and Americans with disabilities."
“This nationwide enforcement action demonstrates that the Criminal Division is at the forefront of the fight against health care fraud and opioid abuse by prosecuting those who have exploited health care benefit programs and their patients for personal gain,” said Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite Jr. of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The coordinated law enforcement actions announced today send a clear deterrent message and should leave no doubt about the department’s ongoing commitment to ensuring the safety of patients and the integrity of health care benefit programs, even amid a continued pandemic. I am proud of the hard work and dedication of those throughout law enforcement who are working to safeguard our health care system and our nation.”
Today’s enforcement actions were led and coordinated by the Health Care Fraud Unit of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, in conjunction with its Health Care Fraud and Appalachian Regional Prescription Opioid (ARPO) Strike Force program, and its core partners, the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG), FBI, and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), as part of the department’s ongoing efforts to combat the devastating effects of health care fraud and the opioid epidemic. The Southern District of California worked with the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and agents from HHS-OIG, FBI, and DEA in the investigation and prosecution of these cases.
Telemedicine Fraud Cases
The largest amount of alleged fraud loss charged in connection with the cases announced today – over $1.1 billion in allegedly false and fraudulent claims submitted by more than 50 criminal defendants in 11 judicial districts nationwide – relates to schemes involving telemedicine: the use of telecommunications technology to provide health care services remotely.
The continued focus on prosecuting health care fraud schemes involving telemedicine reflects the success of the nationwide coordinating role played by the Fraud Section’s National Rapid Response Strike Force, the creation of which was announced at the 2020 National Health Care Fraud and Opioid Takedown. The National Rapid Response Strike Force helped coordinate the prosecution of the telemedicine initiative, Sober Homes initiative, and COVID-19 cases that were announced today. The focus on telemedicine fraud also builds on the telemedicine component of last year’s national takedown and the impact of the 2019 “Operation Brace Yourself” Telemedicine and Durable Medical Equipment Takedown, which resulted in an estimated cost avoidance of more than $1.5 billion in the amount paid by Medicare for orthotic braces in the 17 months following that takedown.
COVID-19 Fraud Cases
Nine defendants in the cases announced today are alleged to have engaged in various health care fraud schemes designed to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in the submission of over $29 million in false billings.
In the Southern District of California, Roselia Kubeck and Rosario Gonzalez pleaded guilty to having approached residents of senior complexes in El Centro and Calexico, California, who were Medicare beneficiaries, and offering COVID-19 screening tests for the residents. The defendants knew at the time that the tests would not actually test for COVID-19 but would be a general respiratory pathogens screening panel that tested for the presence of several kinds of respiratory pathogens. They also took urine samples from the Medicare beneficiaries without explaining that the urine samples were not necessary to conduct a COVID-19 test. The defendants then completed requisition forms for tests on the nasal swabs and urine samples, and inaccurately indicated on the forms that the beneficiaries needed the respiratory tests because they were suffering from acute respiratory infections and needed urine tests because the beneficiaries were long-term users of opiates or had urinary tract infections. The laboratories that performed the tests subsequently submitted inaccurate and medically unnecessary claims to Medicare based on the inaccurate diagnoses that the defendants put on the requisition forms.
The law enforcement action today also includes criminal charges against five defendants across the country related to the misuse of Provider Relief Fund monies. The Provider Relief Fund is part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, a federal law enacted March 2020 designed to provide needed medical care to Americans suffering from COVID-19.
The COVID-19 cases announced today build upon the success of the COVID-19 Health Care Fraud Takedown on May 26, a coordinated law enforcement action against 14 defendants in seven judicial districts for over $128 million in false billings. The law enforcement action and the cases announced today were brought in coordination with the Health Care Fraud Unit’s COVID-19 Interagency Working Group, which is chaired by the National Rapid Response Strike Force and organizes efforts to address illegal activity involving health care programs during the pandemic.
Sober Homes Cases
The sober homes cases are announced on the one-year anniversary of the first ever national sober homes initiative in 2020, which included charges against more than a dozen criminal defendants in connection with more than $845 million of allegedly false and fraudulent claims for tests and treatments for vulnerable patients seeking treatment for drug and/or alcohol addiction. The over $133 million in false and fraudulent claims that are additionally alleged in cases announced today reflect the continued effort by the National Rapid Response Strike Force and the Health Care Fraud Unit’s Los Angeles Strike Force, with the participation of the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Central District of California and the Southern District of Florida, to prosecute those who participated in illegal kickback and bribery schemes involving the referral of patients to substance abuse treatment facilities; those patients could be subjected to medically unnecessary drug testing – often billing thousands of dollars for a single test – and therapy sessions that frequently were not provided, and which resulted in millions of dollars of false and fraudulent claims being submitted to private insurers.
Cases Involving the Illegal Prescription and/or Distribution of Opioids and Cases Involving Traditional Health Care Fraud Schemes
The cases announced today involving the illegal prescription and/or distribution of opioids involve more than 13 defendants, including several charges against medical professionals and others who prescribed over seven million doses of opioids and other prescription narcotics. The cases that fall into more traditional categories of health care fraud include charges against 67 defendants who allegedly participated in schemes to submit more than $160 million in false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and private insurance companies for treatments that were medically unnecessary and often never provided.
In the Southern District of California, Ronald Charles Green Jr. and Melinda Elizabeth Green were charged with conspiring to defraud TRICARE and Medicare out of more than $129 million. In connection with a compounding pharmacy fraud, the defendants allegedly engaged in a scheme involving the submission of false and fraudulent claims to TRICARE for expensive and medically unnecessary pain creams, scar creams and multi-vitamins, which were billed through compound pharmacies. Thereafter, the defendants allegedly launched multiple durable medical equipment companies, and carried out a scheme to defraud Medicare through the submission of false and fraudulent claims for expensive durable medical equipment which were induced through a system of illegal kickbacks. Out of the $129 million in claims, Medicare paid the defendants’ companies more than $69 million.
Prior to the charges announced as part of today’s nationwide enforcement action and since its inception in March 2007, the Health Care Fraud Strike Force, which maintains 15 strike forces operating in 24 districts, has charged more than 4,600 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for approximately $23 billion. In addition to the criminal actions announced today, CMS, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, announced more than 15 payment suspensions to decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.
To view Assistant Attorney General Polite’s remarks, see https://www.justice.gov/opa/video/assistant-attorney-general-kenneth-polite-jr-delivers-remarks-health-care-enforcement.
The Southern District of California cases discussed herein were prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Valerie Chu and Kevin Larsen and investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Inspector General for the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service. Grossman thanked the prosecutors and law enforcement agencies for working hard to achieve justice in these matters.
On May 17, 2021, the Attorney General established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The Task Force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international criminal actors and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by, among other methods, augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts. For more information on the Department’s response to the pandemic, please visit https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus
Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at: https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.
*A complaint, information or indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Defendants Allegedly Attempted to Avoid Government Regulation by Selling Products Through a Company They Deceptively Named Genesis II Church
Miami, Fl. – Federal prosecutors in Miami have charged four Florida residents who allegedly marketed “Miracle Mineral Solution,” a toxic bleach, as a cure for COVID-19, with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to violate the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and criminal contempt.
Ariana Fajardo Orshan, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and Catherine Hermsen, Assistant Commissioner of the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations, made the announcement.
According to the criminal complaint affidavit, Mark Grenon, 62, and his sons, Jonathan Grenon, 34, Jordan Grenon, 26, and Joseph Grenon, 32, all of Bradenton, Florida, manufacture, promote, and sell Miracle Mineral Solution (“MMS”), a chemical solution containing sodium chlorite and water. The Grenons allegedly directed their customers to ingest MMS orally, which causes the solution to become chlorine dioxide, a powerful bleach, typically used for industrial water treatment or bleaching textiles, pulp, and paper. FDA has received reports of people requiring hospitalizations, developing life-threatening conditions, and dying after drinking MMS.
According to the affidavit, the Grenons claim that MMS can treat, prevent, and cure COVID-19. The FDA, however, has not approved MMS for treatment of COVID-19, or for any other use. Rather, in prior official warning statements, the FDA has strongly urged consumers not to purchase or use MMS, explaining that drinking MMS is the same as drinking bleach and can cause dangerous side effects, including severe vomiting, diarrhea, and life-threatening low blood pressure. See https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/danger-dont-drink-miracle-mineral-solution-or-similar-products.
The affidavit also alleges that, before marketing MMS as a cure for COVID-19, the Grenons marketed MMS as a miracle cure-all for dozens of other serious diseases and disorders, including cancer, Alzheimer’s, autism, multiple sclerosis, and HIV/AIDS, even though the FDA had not approved MMS for any use. The Grenons allegedly sold tens of thousands of bottles of MMS nationwide, including to consumers throughout South Florida. They sold this dangerous product under the guise of Genesis II Church of Health and Healing (“Genesis”), an entity they allegedly created in an attempt to avoid government regulation of MMS. According to the charging documents, Genesis’ own websites describe Genesis as a “non-religious church,” and Defendant Mark Grenon, the co-founder of Genesis, has repeatedly acknowledged that Genesis “has nothing to do with religion,” and that he founded Genesis to “legalize the use of MMS” and avoid “going [ ] to jail.”
In addition to charging these defendants with federal conspiracy, the complaint also charges the Grenons with criminal contempt. The United States previously filed a civil case against the defendants and Genesis II Church of Health and Healing. See United States v. Genesis II Church of Health and Healing, et al., Case No. 20-21601-CV-WILLIAMS. In that civil case, the United States obtained court orders halting the Grenons’ distribution of MMS. The criminal charges against the Grenons allege that they willfully violated these court orders. According to the complaint affidavit, the Grenons sent letters to the judge presiding over the civil case saying that they would not comply with the Court’s orders. The Grenons also threatened violence in the letters. The criminal complaint affidavit quotes from these letters.
“We continue to protect the public from criminal conduct that takes advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Ariana Fajardo Orshan, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. “Not only is this MMS product toxic, but its distribution and use may prevent those who aresick from receiving the legitimate healthcare they need. A United States District Court already has ordered the defendants to stop distributing this product; we will not sit idly by as individuals purposefully violate Court orders and put the public in danger.”
“Making claims that unproven drugs, especially potentially dangerous and unapproved chlorine dioxide products, can cure or prevent COVID-19 or any other disease is unacceptable. The Genesis II Church of Health and Healing has actively and deliberately placed consumers at risk with their fraudulent Miracle Mineral Solution and Americans expect and deserve medical treatments that have been scientifically proven to be safe and effective,” said Catherine Hermsen, Assistant Commissioner of the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations. “We commend the efforts of our law enforcement partners for vigorously investigating this matter. The FDA will continue our efforts to make sure these and other like-minded sellers do not jeopardize the health of Americans during this pandemic and in the future.”
U.S. Attorney Fajardo Orshan commended the efforts of the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations, particularly its Miami Field Office. Assistant United States Attorneys Michael B. Homer and John Shipley are prosecuting this case.
A criminal complaint is a charging instrument containing allegations. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.
Related court documents and information may be found on the website of the District Court for the Southern District of Florida at www.flsd.uscourts.gov or at http://pacer.flsd.uscourts.gov, under case number 20-MJ-03050.
Seattle – The former Finance Director at two Seattle area non-profits was sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Seattle to 41 months in prison for embezzling more than $3 million from her employers, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Tessa M. Gorman. Susana Tantico, 63, of Renton, Washington committed the embezzlement over an eleven-year period. At the sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge James L. Robart said, he could not understand how Tantico went from defrauding one non-profit to another, especially since the first provided medical care to immigrant communities. “You were leaving people who aresick today without the money to treat them,” Judge Robart told Tantico.
“Ms. Tantico chose to victimize non-profit organizations, whose work is critical to our community: one employer provided medical care to those who cannot afford it; the other works to assist youth in the criminal justice system,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Gorman. “But over 11 years, knowing she was putting critical services at risk, she stole millions to finance her mortgage, pay for her vacations, and finance her gambling losses.”
According to records filed in the case, in 1999 Tantico began working for a non-profit that provides healthcare to underserved populations. Ultimately, Tantico became the non-profit’s Finance Director. Between 2011 and June 2020, Tantico secretly embezzled millions of dollars from the healthcare organization. Bank records are available only for the period beginning in December 2016. Between December 2016 and 2020, Tantico stole nearly $2.3 million from the healthcare non-profit. She used the non-profit’s debit and credit cards to withdraw $1.6 million at casinos for gambling. She also used the debit and credit cards to pay for personal vacations, such as a $26,000 family trip to Florida, and trips to Las Vegas and San Diego. Tantico also used the healthcare non-profit’s debit and credit cards for more than $83,000 worth of purchases at Nordstrom, and $40,000 worth of purchases at Apple stores.
After running up these expenses, Tantico used the non-profit’s funds to pay the credit card bills and disguised the payments as legitimate expenses. For example, she categorized expenses for one vacation as “pharmacy supplies” in the accounting system. Throughout this timeframe, Tantico told the non-profit auditors that she was aware of no fraud at the non-profit.
In 2020, Tantico went to work as Finance Director for a different non-profit -- one with a focus on criminal justice issues. Tantico used more than $485,000 of the non-profit’s funds for gambling at casinos. She transferred $21,000 from the non-profit to her mortgage servicer to pay her home mortgage. She also transferred money to her personal bank account. Tantico then altered the bank records to hide the embezzlement.
At one point, Tantico was questioned by one of the organization’s banks about the pattern of withdrawals at casinos. She claimed that the non-profit held youth programs at the casinos, and that the withdrawals were for cash prize giveaways. In all, Tantico stole nearly $893,000 from the non-profit. The non-profit has incurred $132,000 in costs to forensically audit its books, fix its accounting procedures and records, and reply to vendors.
In court today, Dominique Davis spoke about the impact of the embezzlement on his organization, Community Passageways. “This was rough, this betrayal of trust. It almost ruined our whole organization. We barely survived this. We were made out to be villains,” Davis told the court.
In recommending a 41-month sentence, Assistant United States Attorney Seth Wilkinson noted, “Tantico abused positions of trust. Tantico was hired (twice) to safeguard the finances of her employers, and they trusted her to manage the funds with integrity. Instead, Tantico not only stole the money, but used her position to hide her theft. She created phony accounting entries that made her expenditures look like business expenses. She doctored bank statements. She lied to auditors. And she showed extreme duplicity by developing financial policies prohibiting the personal use of corporate credit cards, while knowing she was stealing millions of dollars by doing exactly that.” Tantico’s theft averaged about $550,000 per year between 2016 and 2022.
In court today, Tantico said “I am truly sorry… They were my work family…. It’s like I was two separate people…. I always meant to fix it.”
Following prison, Tantico will be on three years of supervised release. She has a restitution obligation of $3,121,572. She provided the court with a $60,000 check today from the sale of her home.
The case was investigated by the FBI.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Seth Wilkinson.
Five people have been charged federally in five separate mail theft cases brought in joint effort with the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to combat identity theft, announced U.S. Attorney Annette L. Hayes. Mail and package theft is a heightened problem in the busy holiday shipping season. These cases have taken some of the worst offenders off the street over the last few months. Some of those charged have already entered guilty pleas, and face mandatory minimum sentences for aggravated identity theft.
“Over the last several months we have worked with investigators from the Postal Inspection Service to federally prosecute mail thieves who repeatedly steal from homes, apartment buildings and other locations around western Washington,” said U.S. Attorney Annette L. Hayes. “These cases should serve as a warning that there are significant consequences for those who steal mail and victimize so many people.”
“The arrest and prosecution of prolific mail thieves is a top priority of the Postal Inspection Service,” said Inspector in Charge Tony Galetti.
Some of the cases pursued in this initiative include:
CHARLLETTE MILLER, 35, of Olympia, Washington pleaded guilty to access device fraud and will be sentenced in March 2018. MILLER used stolen mail, including drivers’ licenses to open bank and credit accounts in the names of her victims and then ran up thousands of dollars in fraudulent charges.
JESSE FRANKLIN DENHAM, 27, is scheduled for trial in January 2018 on an eight-count indictment charging bank fraud, access device fraud and aggravated identity theft. Using stolen mail, DENHAM allegedly opened bank and credit accounts, and forged balance transfer checks associated with the accounts. When arrested, DENHAM had mail from more than 50 victims in his car. DENHAM remains in custody.
SHAWLEE GEIGER, 41, of Seattle, is scheduled for trial in June 2018 on an eight-count indictment charging her with multiple counts of bank fraud and aggravated identity theft. GEIGER allegedly used stolen checks to inflate the balances of bank accounts she controlled and then quickly withdrew cash before the bank was notified that the checks were invalid.
DENNIE DENG, 27, of Auburn, Washington is scheduled for trial in March 2018 on a four-count indictment charging him with bank fraud and aggravated identity theft. DENG allegedly used stolen checks to inflate the balance of his bank account and then withdrew cash. In some instances he altered the stolen checks to further increase the amount of money fraudulently deposited in his account.
TRAVIS SICKLOVAN, 34, pleaded guilty in October to bank fraud, aggravated identity theft and possession of stolen mail. SICKLOVAN was arrested in November 2016, in a Snohomish County hotel with stolen mail from more than 60 victims. SICKLOVAN used the stolen mail to make and cash fraudulent checks and to obtain fraudulent credit cards.
Defendants convicted of aggravated identity theft face a mandatory minimum two years in prison in addition to any other sentence imposed based on other convictions.
The charges contained in a criminal complaint or indictment are only allegations. A person is presumed innocent unless and until he or she is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The Seattle Division of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service employs a multi-faceted approach to address mail theft in western Washington. Using prevention and investigative efforts to combat mail theft, postal inspectors work with local, state and federal agencies across the area. Targeted enforcement data is used to identify, arrest and prosecute the mail thieves who are having the biggest impact on the community. The inspection service also seeks out ways to improve the security of postal facilities and mailboxes leading the effort to secure US Mail to prevent access to would-be thieves. Lastly, the Postal Inspection Service educates the public on ways to mitigate their risk of mail theft and to report it in a timely manner when it does happen.
These cases are being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Andre Penalver, Stephen Hobbs and Seungjae Lee.
Seattle – A Seattle man arrested in a car that had been stolen from a Children’s Hospital garage, was sentenced on Tuesday January 9, 2024, to eight years in prison, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Tessa M. Gorman. Timothy Robert Laucks, 42, pleaded guilty on September 26, 2023, to possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. U.S. District Judge James L. Robart imposed three years of supervised release to follow the prison term.
According to records filed in the case, Laucks was spotted driving a car that had been stolen at the Childrens’ Hospital parking garage, while the owner was inside with a sick child. The car was taken on October 30th and just days later, on November 4, 2022, Seattle Police spotted the car in the Ballard neighborhood. Officers observed the car for a few hours while the driver, Laucks, drove to various homeless encampments in the Seattle area. At these locations, officers observed Laucks carrying a pizza box and trafficking narcotics to members of the homeless encampments.
Officers followed Laucks, who drove to a downtown grocery store parking lot. When officers pulled their marked patrol car pulled in front of the stolen car, Laucks hit the accelerator crashing into the patrol car. He attempted to flee on foot but was caught within moments.
While running, Laucks attempted to toss his jacket and backpack. Those were recovered by officers. In the jacket was a .40 semi-automatic pistol that had been reported stolen in Redmond, Washington. In the backpack were multiple narcotics packaged for distribution, including zanax, fentanyl pills, powder, cocaine, meth, and heroin. Laucks had a second handgun and more than $8,000 cash on him when arrested.
Laucks claimed he had purchased the car from someone else and didn’t realize it had been stolen from a family with a sick child, until he saw some medical paperwork in the car. He told officers he had intended to return the car and the paperwork but “got busy making drops,” or drug sales.
Laucks was indicted by the grand jury on March 1st, 2023.
Laucks has multiple prior convictions which prohibit him from possessing firearms, including felony convictions in Whatcom and Skagit Counties. In asking for a nine-year prison sentence, Assistant United States Attorney Cecelia Gregson wrote to the court, “As a prohibited person, the defendant was precluded from possessing any firearms, let alone using them to traffic drugs. Seattle Police officers observed the defendant peddling drugs thinly disguised in a pizza box to various homeless communities in the city. The defendant’s prior encounters with the criminal system have failed to deter or dissuade him from selling drugs and carrying firearms.”
The case was investigated by the Seattle Police Department. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Cecelia Gregson.
SAN JUAN, P.R. –The United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General has honored the US Attorney’s Office, District of Puerto Rico with two distinguished awards, the Inspector General Cooperative Achievement Award, and the Inspector General’s Award for Fighting Fraud, Waste, and Abuse, announced US Attorney for the District of Puerto Rico, Rosa Emilia Rodríguez-Vélez.
This year’s Inspector General Cooperative Achievement Award recognizes a group of individuals from different federal and state agencies in Puerto Rico whose leadership, commitment, hard work, dedication, and cooperative achievements in the relief efforts following the Hurricane María’s aftermath, also known as the Puerto Rico Quality of Care and Patient Relief Effort/Elderly Task Force.
The USAO-PR recipients are US Attorney Rosa Emilia Rodríguez-Vélez, Executive Assistant US Attorney Jacqueline D. Novas, AUSA Olga Castellón-Miranda, and Paralegal Specialist Cristzayda Matos.
On September 20 2017, Hurricane Maria crossed directly over the island of Puerto Rico, which was still in the process of recovering from the effects of the previous Hurricane, Irma. The entire island was without power, water, and there was almost no cell service. There was severe flooding, buildings had sustained structural damage, and the roads were impassible due to downed electrical power lines and trees.
The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Puerto Rico partnered with HHS-OIG, the Puerto Rico Department of Justice, other state and federal agencies and took a lead role on a quality of care initiative, conducting site surveys at elderly homes throughout the island, investigating potential quality of care issues while providing assistance and resources such as food, water, and hygiene products to those elderly homes residents. As a result of this initiative, a total of 839 elderly homes were visited and approximately 16,330 elderly patients were assisted as of December 2017. This initiative also led to the prosecution of an elderly homeowner who physically abuse of elderly patients.
During the initiative, these volunteers worked under challenging conditions in areas that had substantial debris and had no electrical power. Despite these obstacles, they made great contributions to the health and welfare of the sick and elderly citizens of Puerto Rico.
The Inspector General’s Award for Fighting Fraud, Waste, and Abuse, was granted to an outstanding team that investigated and prosecuted a group of government employees from the Puerto Rico Department of Health who conspired to defraud the Medicaid Program in PR. The recipients are: Assistant US Attorney and Criminal Division Chief José Capó-Iriarte, AUSAs Luke Cass, Seth Erbe, Rafael López, Chief of the Civil Division Héctor Ramírez-Carbó and Special AUSA Amanda Soto.
On February 24, 2016, a Federal Grand Jury in the District of Puerto Rico returned a fourteen-count indictment against eight individuals for bribery, health care fraud, conspiracy to commit health care fraud, conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, mail fraud, false statements related to health care matters and aggravated identity theft.
The collaboration in this case marked the first time in which health care fraud violations related to the Medicaid program were charged in an Office of Investigation lead investigation in Puerto Rico. The collaboration also marked the first time criminal and civil actions were pursued against Medicaid participants. Furthermore, this collaboration also resulted in the administrative disenrollment of hundreds of Medicaid participants suspected of providing false statements during their enrollment process.
Geoffrey S. Berman, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that KAM WONG, the former chief executive officer (“CEO”) of Municipal Credit Union (“MCU”), a non-profit financial institution, was sentenced today in Manhattan federal court to 66 months in prison for defrauding and embezzling millions of dollars from MCU during his time as CEO. WONG previously pled guilty to embezzlement from a federally insured credit union before U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl, who imposed today’s sentence.
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said: “For years, Kam Wong, the then-CEO of New York’s oldest credit union, betrayed the credit union’s hard-working members from the perch of his executive suite by siphoning off millions of dollars in company money for his personal benefit. Wong then tried to cover up what he had done by making false statements to federal investigators and creating false and misleading documents. He will now serve a substantial prison sentence for his crime. I commend the Special Agents of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and our law enforcement partners, for their tireless efforts to protect the credit union’s members and expose misconduct in this ongoing investigation.”
According to the Complaint, the Information, other filings in Manhattan federal court, statements made in court and publicly available documents:
WONG, from 2007 until shortly after his arrest in May 2018, was the CEO and president of MCU, a non-profit financial institution headquartered in New York, New York, which is federally insured by the National Credit Union Administration (“NCUA”). MCU is the oldest credit union in New York State and one of the oldest and largest in the country, providing banking services to more than 588,000 members, including municipal, state, and federal workers in New York City. MCU’s earnings are intended to be directed back to its members in the form of more favorable rates and fewer and lower fees for products and services.
During his tenure as CEO and president, despite publicly praising credit union values, WONG engaged in a long-running multi-faceted scheme to obtain money from MCU to which he knew he was not entitled, and took steps to seek to conceal what he had done. Among other things, WONG embezzled from and defrauded MCU by submitting sham invoices for dental work never performed on him or paid by him, and, as a result, obtained reimbursement for hundreds of thousands of dollars of such nonexistent dental work. In addition, WONG fraudulently caused MCU to pay him additional monies that he knew he was not entitled to receive, including millions of dollars of payments in lieu of purported long-term disability insurance, and for purported taxes owed on these and other employment benefits. In total, WONG defrauded MCU out of at least approximately $9.9 million.
WONG also repeatedly misapplied money and other things of value from MCU, with respect to, among other things, the purchase of a Mercedes-Benz for his personal use; the leasing of multiple luxury vehicles for his personal use at the same time; the purchase of electronic devices (including, iPhones, iPads, and laptops) for personal use by WONG and others; reimbursement, as business expenses, of personal expenses, including hotel stays and expensive meals; purported reimbursement payments for repairs to luxury vehicles MCU had leased for WONG, which repair work was already covered by MCU’s insurance; cash advances to which he was not entitled; educational, housing, and living expenses for two of WONG’s friend’s adult relatives, whom WONG caused MCU to hire; and payments for leave days that did not comply with and exceeded what was provided for under his employment contract. In addition, WONG caused MCU to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to a former MCU Supervisory Committee member’s company, in violation of the MCU’s conflict of interest policy, so that the member would provide WONG with controlled substances for his personal use.
In January 2018, after WONG learned of the federal investigation, WONG sought to obstruct justice by making false statements to federal agents and creating false and misleading documents to try, after the fact, to explain and justify some of his illicit payments.
* * *
In addition to his prison term, WONG, 63, of Valley Stream, Long Island, was sentenced to three years of supervised release, and was ordered to forfeit $9,890,375 and to pay restitution in the same amount to MCU.
U.S. Attorney Berman praised the outstanding work of the Special Agents of the United States Attorney’s Office. Mr. Berman also thanked the New York County District Attorney’s Office, the New York State Department of Financial Services, and NCUA.
The case is being prosecuted by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Eli J. Mark and Daniel C. Richenthal are in charge of the prosecution, with assistance of Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Alona Katz from the New York County District Attorney’s Office.
Geoffrey S. Berman, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that KAM WONG, the former chief executive officer (“CEO”) and president of the oldest New York credit union (the “Credit Union”), a non-profit financial institution, pled guilty in Manhattan federal court today to embezzling millions of dollars from the Credit Union. WONG pled guilty before U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl.
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said: “As he admitted in court today, Kam Wong, the former CEO and president of New York’s oldest credit union, abused his position of trust as a guardian of municipal, state, and federal workers’ financial accounts to enrich himself. In so doing, Wong stole money from the credit union that could have gone to the credit union’s members, and tried to cover up what he had done by making false statements to federal investigators and creating false and misleading documents. I commend the Special Agents of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and our law enforcement partners, for their tireless efforts in this ongoing investigation.”
According to the Complaint, the Information, statements made in court and publicly available documents:
WONG was the CEO and president of the Credit Union, a non-profit financial institution headquartered in New York, New York, which is federally insured by the National Credit Union Administration Board. The Credit Union is the oldest credit union in New York State and one of the oldest and largest in the country, providing banking services to more than 425,000 members, including municipal, state, and federal workers in New York City. The Credit Union’s earnings are intended to be directed back to its members in the form of more favorable rates and fewer and lower fees for products and services.
From 2013 through January 2018, WONG engaged in a long-running multi-faceted scheme to obtain money from the Credit Union to which he knew he was not entitled, and took steps to seek to conceal what he had done. Among other things, WONG embezzled from and defrauded the Credit Union by submitting sham invoices for dental work never performed on him or paid by him, and, as a result, fraudulently obtained reimbursement for hundreds of thousands of dollars of such nonexistent dental work. In addition, WONG fraudulently caused the Credit Union to pay him additional monies that he knew he was not entitled to receive, including millions of dollars of payments in lieu of purported long-term disability insurance, and for purported taxes owed on these and other employment benefits.
WONG also misapplied money and other things of value from the Credit Union, with respect to, among other things, reimbursement payments for repairs to luxury vehicles the Credit Union leased to WONG, which repair work was already covered by the Credit Union’s insurance; cash advances to which he was not entitled; educational, housing, and living expenses for two of WONG’s friend’s relatives; payments for his leave days that did not comply with and exceeded what was provided for under his employment contract; the purchase of a Mercedes-Benz automobile that was not provided for under his employment contract; the leasing of multiple luxury vehicles at the same time; electronic devices (including, iPhones, iPads, and laptops) for personal use by WONG and others; and reimbursement, as business expenses, of personal expenses, including hotel stays. In addition, WONG obtained controlled substances, for personal use, from a former Credit Union Supervisory Committee member.
In January 2018, after WONG learned about the investigation, WONG sought to obstruct justice by making false statements to federal investigators and creating false and misleading documents to try, after the fact, to explain and justify some of these payments.
* * *
WONG, 62, of Valley Stream, Long Island, pled guilty to one count of embezzlement from a federally insured credit union, which carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison. As a condition of his plea, WONG also agreed to forfeit at least $9,890,375 and to pay at least $9,890,375 in restitution to the Credit Union.
WONG is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Koeltl on April 5, 2019, at 10:00 a.m.
The maximum potential sentence in this case is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes only, as the sentencing of WONG will be determined by the judge.
U.S. Attorney Berman praised the outstanding work of the Special Agents of the United States Attorney’s Office. Mr. Berman also thanked the New York County District Attorney’s Office, the New York State Department of Financial Services, and the National Credit Union Administration.
The case is being prosecuted by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Eli J. Mark and Daniel C. Richenthal are in charge of the prosecution, with assistance from Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Alona Katz from the New York County District Attorney’s Office.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the second most severe disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE2
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the third most severe
disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE3
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that
carried the fourth most
severe disposition and
Penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE4
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE4
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE4
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE4
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
Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that KAM WONG, the chief executive officer and president of the oldest New York credit union (the “Credit Union”), a non-profit financial institution, was charged in Manhattan federal court with fraud, embezzlement, and aggravated identity theft offenses related to defrauding the Credit Union in connection with hundreds of thousands of sham expense reimbursements. WONG was arrested this morning and is scheduled to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott in Manhattan federal court later today.
U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said: “As alleged, the CEO and president of New York’s oldest credit union abused his position of trust as a guardian of municipal, state, and federal workers’ financial accounts to enrich himself. Kam Wong allegedly stole money from the credit union’s earnings that were intended to reward the credit union’s members, not line Wong’s pockets. I want to thank my Office’s Special Agents for their dedicated efforts in this ongoing investigation.”
According to the allegations contained in the Complaint[1] unsealed today in Manhattan federal court and publicly available documents:
KAM WONG, the defendant, is the CEO and president of the Credit Union, a non-profit financial institution headquartered in New York, New York, which is federally insured. The Credit Union is the oldest credit union in New York State and one of the oldest and largest in the country, providing bank services to more than 425,000 members, including municipal, state, and federal workers in New York City. The Credit Union’s earnings are intended to be directed back to its members in the form of more favorable rates and fewer and lower fees for products and services.
From at least 2013 through January 2018, WONG engaged in a long-running multi-faceted scheme to obtain money from the Credit Union to which he was not entitled, and took steps to seek to conceal what he had done. Among other things, WONG allegedly embezzled from and defrauded the Credit Union by submitting sham invoices (the “Sham Invoices”) for dental work never performed on him or paid by him, and, as a result, obtained reimbursement for hundreds of thousands of dollars of such nonexistent dental work, as well as for his alleged personal tax liability for these and other payments or benefits.
In addition to the alleged fraud in connection with dental reimbursements, the ongoing investigation has revealed that WONG obtained numerous other payments from the Credit Union under suspicious or questionable circumstances. These include millions of dollars in cash payments in lieu of a long-term disability insurance policy, as well as millions more for taxes to cover those payments; reimbursement payments for repairs to a luxury vehicle the Credit Union leased to WONG, which repair work was already covered by insurance; cash withdrawals from a Credit Union business credit card for purportedly “testing” the Credit Union’s ATMs; substantial educational, housing, and living expenses for two of WONG’s friend’s relatives, whom the Credit Union hired at his direction to be interns; tens of thousands of dollars in annual cash advances, for which WONG provided no supporting documentation; and payments for 320 days of purportedly unused sick leave, in violation of WONG’s contract and the Credit Union’s policies.
WONG generally deposited the proceeds of his scheme into a Credit Union account, from which, between July 2013 and January 2018, he then withdrew approximately $1.9 million from ATMs, over the course of more than 2,500 transactions, an average of more than one-and-a-half transactions per day. From this account, WONG also spent at least approximately $3.55 million on New York State Lottery tickets.
In or about January 2018, after WONG learned about the investigation, WONG misled federal agents and Credit Union Board members in order to, after the fact, explain and justify some of these payments. On or about February 22, 2018, WONG was placed on leave by the Credit Union’s Board of Directors upon the recommendation of a Special Committee overseeing an internal investigation prompted by this criminal investigation.
* * *
WONG, 62, of Valley Stream, Long Island, is charged with one count of embezzlement from a federally insured credit union, one count of bank fraud, one count of wire fraud, each of which carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison, and one count of aggravated identify theft, which carries a mandatory two-year consecutive term in prison.
The maximum potential sentences in these cases are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by a judge.
Mr. Berman praised the work of the Special Agents of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
The case is being prosecuted by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Eli J. Mark and Daniel C. Richenthal are in charge of the prosecution.
The charges contained in the Complaint are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Complaint and the description of the Complaint set forth below constitute only allegations, and every fact described should be treated as an allegation.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the second most severe disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE2
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the third most severe
disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE3
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that
carried the fourth most
severe disposition and
Penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE4
Format: N4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE4
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE4
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE4
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
Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, James J. Hunt, the Special Agent-in-Charge of the New York Field Division of the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”), James P. O’Neill, the Commissioner of the Police Department for the City of New York (“NYPD”), and George P. Beach II, the Superintendent of the New York State Police (“NYSP”), announced the unsealing today of a Superseding Indictment charging 10 members and associates of Manhattan robbery crews with racketeering, narcotics, robbery, burglary, and firearms offenses. Six of the charged defendants are members of a street gang known as the 200, operating in and around northern Manhattan. One of those defendants is also charged with the 2014 murder of Orlando Rivera in furtherance of the 200 gang.
A total of five defendants were taken into custody today; one other defendant was already in federal custody. Five of the 10 defendants will be presented and arraigned before U.S. Magistrate Judge Kevin N. Fox later today. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain.
Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said: “As alleged in the Indictment, the defendants wreaked havoc on their northern Manhattan neighborhood for years through a litany of crimes that harmed local businesses, injured robbery victims, and killed an innocent man. Thanks to the extraordinary work of the DEA, the NYPD, and the State Police, the defendants will now face justice for their crimes.”
DEA Special Agent-in-Charge James J. Hunt said: “DEA’s investigations have a knack for exposing violent crime; evident in our arrests of MS-13 members, Trinitarios, Sinaloa Cartel members and today’s 200 Crew. The 200 Crew’s alleged reign of terror is responsible for a rap sheet of crimes ranging from robbery to racketeering and murder. I commend the New York Drug Enforcement Task Force REDRUM unit and U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of New York on today’s arrests.”
NYPD Commissioner James P. O’Neill said: “Dismantling violent street gangs and ending the criminal activities that support them will always be a priority for the NYPD and our law enforcement partners. I thank the detectives, special agents, and others involved in this important case, and commend the DEA and the Southern District for sharing our vision of a New York City in which all those we serve become more safe each year, and feel more safe in every neighborhood, as well.”
NYSP Superintendent George P. Beach II said: “These charges are a direct result of the hard work and cooperation among law enforcement at all levels and I applaud all of our partners for their dedication to fighting organized crime. The disruption of this alleged illegal operation serves as a strong reminder that gang and related activities such as racketeering, drug trafficking, burglary, and the violence that is perpetuated by such crimes, will not be tolerated.”
As alleged in the Superseding Indictment unsealed today in Manhattan federal court and in other court papers[1]:
From 2014 through September 2018, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, MILTON CHARDON, a/k/a “Blanquito,” CHRISTIAN PABON, a/k/a “Banga,” BRYAN CASTILLO, a/k/a “True,” GEORGE CITRONELLE, a/k/a “CY,” a/k/a “BY,” JEREMY ESTEVEZ, a/k/a “Jerm Racks,” and YASMIL FERTIDES, a/k/a “Little Half,” were all members and associates of the 200 street gang. In order to fund the gang, protect its territory, and promote its standing, members of the 200 engaged in, among other things, narcotics trafficking, robbery, and other acts of violence, including murder. 200 members sold heroin, cocaine, marijuana, and OxyContin in the gang’s territory, possessed shared firearms, and engaged in shootings as part of their gang membership.
In particular, on October 2, 2014, PABON murdered Orlando Rivera in the vicinity of 1653 Saint Nicholas Avenue in Manhattan, in order to maintain and increase his status in the 200 gang. Additionally, on December 17, 2015, CHARDON and FERTIDES shot at and attempted to kill an individual in the vicinity of the intersection of Sickles Street and Sherman Avenue in Manhattan, and on November 21, 2016, CITRONELLE shot at victims of a robbery he carried out with other 200 members and associates in the vicinity of the intersection of Academy Street and Nagle Avenue in Manhattan.
Members of the 200 gang also participated with others in a conspiracy to commit robberies, a conspiracy to commit pharmacy burglaries, and a conspiracy to distribute oxycodone, all between 2011 and 2018. CHARDON and FERTIDES participated in these conspiracies with SAMANTHA BATISTA, NOEL MARTINEZ, a/k/a “Crazy,” DOMINGO TOLENTINO, a/k/a “Juvi,” and JUAN CALDERON, a/k/a “Priva.” BATISTA, MARTINEZ, and TOLENTINO robbed a marijuana dealer on or about November 8, 2016, at 510 West 188th Street in Manhattan, during which a firearm was discharged. The pharmacies that the crew targeted included a pharmacy in the vicinity of 1985 University Avenue in the Bronx, which CHARDON and CALDERON targeted on October 8, 2016; a pharmacy in the vicinity of 1985 University Avenue in the Bronx, which FERTIDES and CALDERON targeted on June 15, 2017; and a pharmacy in the vicinity of 212 Nagle Avenue in Manhattan, which CHARDON, TOLENTINO, and CALDERON targeted on October 10, 2016.
* * *
Defendants CHARDON, CASTILLO, CITRONELLE, MARTINEZ, and CALDERON were arrested in New York yesterday and today. They will be arraigned later this afternoon in Manhattan federal court. FERTIDES will be arraigned September 21, 2018, before Judge Swain.
Charts containing the names, charges, and maximum and minimum penalties for the defendants are set forth below. The maximum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendants will be determined by the judge.
Mr. Berman praised the outstanding investigative work of the DEA’s New York Drug Enforcement Task Force, comprising agents and officers of the DEA, NYPD, and NYSP, and the Special Agents of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. Mr. Berman also thanked the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office for its assistance in the investigation.
The case is being handled by the Office’s Violent and Organized Crime Unit. Assistant United States Attorneys Hagan Scotten, Margaret Graham, Maurene Comey, and Karin Portlock are in charge of the prosecution.
The charges contained in the Indictments are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
COUNT
CHARGE
DEFENDANTS
MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM PENALTIES
1
Racketeering
Conspiracy
18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)
MILTON CHARDON, 25
CHRISTIAN PABON, 26
BRYAN CASTILLO, 23
GEORGE CITRONELLE, 23
JEREMY ESTEVEZ, 21
YASMIL FERTIDES, 29
Maximum (Pabon):
Life
Maximum
(other defendants):
20 years in prison
2
Murder in Aid of
Racketeering
18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(1) and 2
CHRISTIAN PABON
Minimum:
Death, or Life in prison
3
Causing Death through Use of a Firearm
18 U.S.C. §§ 924(j) and 2
CHRISTIAN PABON
Maximum:
Death, or Life in prison
Minimum:
5 years in prison
4
Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering
18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(5) and 2
MILTON CHARDON
YASMIL FERTIDES
Maximum:
10 years in prison
5
Firearms Offense
18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) and 2
MILTON CHARDON
YASMIL FERTIDES
Maximum:
Life in prison
Minimum:
10 years in prison
6
Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering
18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(6) and 2
GEORGE CITRONELLE
Maximum:
3 years in prison
7
Firearms Offense
18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) and 2
GEORGE CITRONELLE
Maximum:
Life in prison
Minimum:
10 years in prison
8
Narcotics
Conspiracy
21 U.S.C. § 846
MILTON CHARDON
GEORGE CITRONELLE
YASMIL FERTIDES
Maximum (Fertides):
Life in prison
Minimum (Fertides):
10 years in prison
Maximum
(other defendants):
40 years in prison
Minimum
(other defendants):
5 years in prison
9
Robbery Conspiracy
18 U.S.C. § 1951
MILTON CHARDON
YASMIL FERTIDES
SAMANTHA BATISTA, 26
NOEL MARTINEZ, 23
DOMINGO TOLENTINO, 24
JUAN CALDERON, 29
Maximum:
20 years in prison
10
Robbery
18 U.S.S. §§ 1951 and 2
SAMANTHA BATISTA
NOEL MARTINEZ
DOMINGO TOLENTINO
Maximum:
20 years in prison
11
Firearms Offense
18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) and 2
SAMANTHA BATISTA
NOEL MARTINEZ
DOMINGO TOLENTINO
Maximum:
Life in prison
Minimum:
10 years in prison
12
Narcotics Conspiracy
21 U.S.C. § 846
SAMANTHA BATISTA
NOEL MARTINEZ
DOMINGO TOLENTINO
Maximum:
5 years in prison
13
Pharmacy Burglary Conspiracy
18 U.S.C. § 2118(d)
MILTON CHARDON
YASMIL FERTIDES
SAMANTHA BATISTA
NOEL MARTINEZ
DOMINGO TOLENTINO
JUAN CALDERON
Maximum:
20 years in prison
14
Narcotics Conspiracy
21 U.S.C. § 846
MILTON CHARDON
YASMIL FERTIDES
SAMANTHA BATISTA
NOEL MARTINEZ
DOMINGO TOLENTINO
JUAN CALDERON
Maximum:
20 years in prison
[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Indictment constitutes only allegations, and every fact described herein should be treated as an allegation.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
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
A physician who practiced in Oak Park pleaded guilty yesterday to writing prescriptions for oxycodone without medical justification, acting United States Attorney Daniel L. Lemisch announced today.
Lemisch was joined in the announcement by Timothy Plancon, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration and Manny Muriel, Special Agent in Charge of the Detroit Field Office of the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation.
Jennifer Franklin, 40, of Harrison Township, entered the guilty plea before U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh.
As part of the plea agreement, Franklin, admitted that between the latter part of 2013 and April 2015, she conspired with Boris Zigmond, to prescribe medically unnecessary oxycodone. Franklin acknowledged that she earned approximately $200,000 from the scheme to distribute oxycodone. She also acknowledged that the street value of the oxycodone she prescribed without justification exceeded $2 million.
Boris Zigmond, Dr. Carlos Godoy, and six other codefendants have previously pleaded guilty for their roles in the conspiracy.
"More people die from overdoses of prescription drugs in America than from overdoses of all other drugs combined,” Lemisch said. “We hope that prosecuting the doctors who are putting these drugs on the streets will deter others from contributing to this epidemic.”
IRS-CI Special Agent in Charge Muriel, stated “It is unfortunate that greed and the desire for financial gain overpowers a physician’s Hippocratic Oath to use treatment to help the sick, but never with a view to injury and wrong-doing. The medically unnecessary prescribing of Oxycodone continues to be a contributing factor to the Opioid epidemic that is facing Michigan. IRS and its partners will continue to work to identify those who look to gain financial reward from medically unnecessary prescriptions.”
As part of their plea agreements, Zigmond, Franklin, and Godoy could receive a maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment.
SAN FRANCISCO – U.S. Attorney Ismail J. Ramsey convened a press conference today bringing together numerous federal, state, and local law enforcement authorities to announce “All Hands on Deck,” a law enforcement initiative to address what has become endemic drug dealing in the Tenderloin District of San Francisco. U.S. Attorney Ramsey explained that the new joint initiative, focused on the Tenderloin, is designed to change the basic cost/benefit analysis for fentanyl dealers throughout the Northern District of California.
Representing several state and local entities were notables including San Francisco Mayor London Breed, San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins, Chief of the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) William Scott, San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, Commander Sunshine Garside of the California Highway Patrol, and Deputy Chief of the Bay Area Rapid Transit Police Chris Vogan. They were joined on stage by federal law enforcement personnel: Brian Clark of the Drug Enforcement Administration; Robert Tripp of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Jennifer Cicolani of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; Tatum King of Homeland Security Investigations; and Shawn Bradstreet of the U.S. Secret Service, as well as Acting U.S. Marshal Jay Bieber, Executive Director of the Northern California High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Mike Sena, U.S. Postal Inspector in Charge Rafael Nunez, and Internal Revenue Service– Criminal Investigation Supervisory Special Agent Steve Martins.
Although All Hands on Deck focuses on drug dealing in the Tenderloin, several of the elements have reach outside of the San Francisco neighborhood and throughout the Northern District of California. Elements of the initiative include the following:
• ramping up arrests of street dealers and suppliers of fentanyl who sell fentanyl near federal buildings (including near the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse at 7th and Mission Streets, the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building on 7th and Mission Streets, and the Phillip Burton Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse at 450 Golden Gate Avenue);
• expanding efforts to track down and hold accountable suppliers of fentanyl;
• bringing additional charges against persons operating money services operations who turn a blind eye to drug trafficking and money laundering transactions on their networks;
• using targeted wiretaps, arrests, and searches throughout the Bay Area to enable drug seizures and to stem the flow of drugs and dealers coming into San Francisco from nearby counties;
• conducting regular joint federal and SFPD “jump out” operations in the Tenderloin to make on-the-spot arrests for open-air drug dealing;
• “fast-tracking” certain federal cases so that they take as little as a month from time of arrest to disposition; and
• federal “adoption” of state cases to raise the stakes by holding drug dealers accountable in the federal system.
U.S. Attorney Ramsey stated that “our drug crisis has been fueled in part because selling fentanyl has become a lucrative vocation for people who have found our neighborhoods, and principally the Tenderloin District, to be a convenient and risk-free marketplace.” The U.S. Attorney disclosed that several of the participants at the press conference have been coordinating closely for months to disrupt fentanyl distribution in San Francisco and to remove fentanyl dealers from San Francisco neighborhoods. The result, U.S Attorney stated, has been an increase in collaboration, cooperation, and coordination between all the participants at the press conference. “All Hands on Deck,” said U.S. Attorney Ramsey, “is designed to change the basic cost/benefit analysis for fentanyl dealers. Today’s message is simple: selling fentanyl in the Tenderloin will result in your arrest and prosecution.”
“The Tenderloin has become ground zero for drug tourism. On average, we lose three lives a day to drug poisoning from sales connected to this area,” said DEA Special Agent in Charge Brian Clark. “The community has said, loud and clear, that they aresick and tired of the death and destruction caused by this lawlessness. As leaders in law enforcement, I can tell you we are working tirelessly to hold accountable the people responsible for this devastation.”
“We’ve seen an increased and significant presence from federal law enforcement taking on drug enforcement,” said Mayor Breed, “and we greatly appreciate their partnership in this city. I want to thank the U.S. Attorney and his team and the DEA for dedicating resources to disrupting the flow of drugs on our streets and for their commitment to San Francisco. Their work, along with our state and local law enforcement, is having an impact on our streets.”
“Law enforcement approaches traditionally applied to drug dealing in our neighborhoods simply have not caught up the challenges presented by this new drug,” stated U.S. Attorney Ramsey. “Yet, the tools of law enforcement can address some of the root causes of this epidemic. We in law enforcement are determined to double-down, triple-down, and take all necessary steps to prevent this poison from reaching our streets.”
“Current conditions on our streets are completely unacceptable and require all levels of government to work together to close open-air drug markets and hold suspected drug dealers accountable for the unprecedented death and addiction that their trade has wrought on our city,” said District Attorney Brooke Jenkins. “I would like to thank Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi for her steadfast leadership and tireless advocacy on behalf of San Franciscans, which accelerated the federal government’s approval of San Francisco for Operation Overdrive. Working together with our partners in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, these federal law enforcement agencies, as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, we will be more able to identify, arrest and prosecute suspected drug traffickers at all levels. Every legal resource available to us must be used to deter and disrupt the flagrant drug trafficking in our community.”
“The SFPD will not tolerate people dealing drugs on our streets, and we will hold these dealers accountable, and sustain the effort over time,” Chief Bill Scott said. “I want to thank our federal partners and our officers for their hard work in helping make our beautiful city safe for everyone to enjoy.”
The participants at the press conference stressed that a new reality for San Francisco drug dealers exists and that the consequences for dealing drugs in the Tenderloin are changing. The chances of getting caught have increased and any hope for profits must now be weighed against unacceptable losses in time, money, seized drugs, and other disruptions that criminal convictions present. Over the past four months, nearly 50 kilograms of fentanyl were removed from the streets in the Tenderloin, nearly double the amount taken off the streets in the same area during the same period last year. Similarly, 12 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized in the last four months—a 169% increase from the same period last year.
Information shared at the press conference made clear that greater resources from each of the represented law enforcement partners are being deployed. U.S. Attorney Ramsey pledged that every criminal Assistant United States Attorney in the Northern District of California will be involved in this fight in one way or another. In addition, the DEA described how additional resources are being contributed through Operation Overdrive, and Mayor Breed, Chief Scott, and DA Jenkins all described devoting additional resources to respond to the fentanyl crisis. As stated by U.S. Attorney Ramsey, “‘All Hands on Deck’ means we are using our resources in a way that addresses the magnitude of the problem that fentanyl presents.”
Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and John Gore, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, today announced a proposed settlement with the City of New York to compensate City-employed registered nurses and midwives who were subjected to discrimination because they are women. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York filed the proposed settlement along with a complaint in federal district court. According to the allegations of the complaint, the City failed to recognize that the work of predominantly-female registered nurses and midwives was “physically taxing,” while deeming other predominantly-male occupations, including in the health care field, physically taxing. As a result, City employees in the predominantly-male physically taxing jobs were allowed to retire with full pensions as early as age 50, while registered nurses and midwives, who are predominantly female, could not retire with full pensions until age 55 or 57.
“City nurses and midwives care for sick and injured adults, juveniles and infants through long days and nights under difficult circumstances, and rightfully should be recognized as doing physically taxing work,” said U.S. Attorney Donoghue. “Equal treatment under law means just that, equal treatment and this Office is committed to ensuring that women are treated fairly and equitably in the workplace.” He also thanked the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) for its investigative work prior to referring this matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
“This Settlement Agreement will provide significant relief to a class of female nurses and midwives employed by the City of New York who were harmed by the City’s discriminatory employment practices,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John Gore. “We applaud the United States’ Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York for prosecuting this matter and acknowledge the City of New York’s commendable efforts in ensuring that this matter was brought to resolution without protracted litigation.”
Beginning in 1968, the City allowed certain City employees with 25 years of service the option of retiring with full pensions beginning at the age of 50, if the employees worked in jobs the City deemed physically taxing. At that time, the City refused to recognize the work of registered nurses and midwives, which was performed mostly by women, as physically taxing, but did recognize as physically taxing work performed mostly by men in occupations such as Emergency Medical Specialist - EMT, Exterminator, Motor Vehicle Dispatcher, Window Cleaner, Foremen and Plumbers.
Beginning in 2004, the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA), a labor union representing City-employed registered nurses and midwives, began requesting that the City recognize the work of registered nurses and midwives as physically taxing and also allow NYSNA’s qualifying members the option of retiring as early as age 50. The City denied that request in 2004, and again in 2006 and 2008. Thereafter, NYSNA and four of its members filed complaints with the EEOC. The EEOC determined there was reason to believe that the City had discriminated against the nurses when it failed to recognize registered nurse and midwife occupational titles as “physically taxing” in 1968, and again when NYSNA made its requests in 2004, 2006 and 2008. The EEOC then referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
The settlement applies to a proposed class of approximately 1,665 registered nurses and midwives hired by the City from September 15, 1965, through March 31, 2012. Subject to court approval, the City would pay these registered nurses and midwives, who would otherwise have been eligible to retire at an earlier age, between $1,000 and $99,000, depending upon their years of qualifying service and the number of years earlier they would have been eligible to retire. The settlement also provides for the City to pay attorney’s fees and an additional $100,000 to the four nurses who initiated the EEOC complaint which led to today’s result.
This matter was handled by Eastern District of New York Assistant United States Attorneys John Vagelatos and Michael J. Goldberger.
Gary Davis, Joel Lee Faison and Tamien Trent were arraigned late yesterday afternoon before United States District Court Judge Joseph F. Bianco at the federal courthouse in Central Islip on a 13-count indictment charging them with conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute controlled substances, including heroin and fentanyl, using firearms in connection with these drug trafficking crimes and related charges. At their initial appearances on September 27, 2018, each defendant was ordered permanently detained.
Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; William F. Sweeney, Jr., Assistant Director-in-Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), New York Field Office; Angel M. Melendez, Special Agent-in-Charge, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), New York; Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney for Suffolk County; and Geraldine Hart, Commissioner, Suffolk County Police Department (SCPD), announced the charges.
“As alleged in the indictment, these defendants sold tremendous amounts of heroin, fentanyl and fentanyl analogues throughout Long Island, flooding our streets with life-threatening drugs and enriching themselves at the expense of those suffering from addiction,” stated United States Attorney Donoghue. “The Eastern District and our partners will continue the fight to protect our communities from those who deal heroin and other deadly drugs seeking to profit from the opioid epidemic.” Mr. Donoghue extended his grateful appreciation to the New York National Guard Counter Drug Task Force for their assistance in the investigation.
“We know these mixtures of fentanyl and heroin are killing people every day in our communities,” stated FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge Sweeney. “One of the subjects in this case actually bragged about how potent the drugs were that he was selling. The FBI and the agencies we’ve partnered with on the FBI Long Island Gang Task Force work each day to stop the proliferation of these deadly drugs, and we won’t stop until we round up every dealer who looks to make money on the pain and suffering of people.”
“The charges against the defendants illustrate the law enforcement community’s shared and unwavering commitment to ridding the community of deadly drugs and bringing to justice those who distribute this poison in our communities,” stated HSI Special Agent-in-Charge Melendez.
“What is particularly sickening about these defendants is that they used as a selling point the fact that the drugs were causing overdoses. They did so by selling fentanyl analogs – synthetic narcotics that are specifically designed by drug dealers to evade law enforcement,” stated Suffolk County District Attorney Sini. “The message here is clear: we will not tolerate individuals peddling this poison in our communities and no matter what steps they take to evade law enforcement, we will find them. I thank our partners in the FBI, ICE, and the Suffolk County Police Department for continuing to partner with my office to target drug dealers and help end our community's opioid crisis. Most of all, I appreciate the outstanding work done by the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York and its great prosecutors.”
“Taking these three high-level suppliers off the streets will make a significant impact on the amount of drugs that are available for sale,” stated SCPD Commissioner Hart. “These three unabashedly fed the addictions of countless individuals, ruining the lives of not only those addicted, but of their families as well. We should all be proud of the work of everyone involved in not only this case but all the detectives and investigators who dedicate their efforts to fighting the drug epidemic that’s impacting our communities.”
According to the indictment and court filings, from approximately September 2014 until their arrests on September 27, 2018, the defendants distributed in excess of 100 kilograms of heroin, fentanyl and fentanyl analogues, as well as crack cocaine across Long Island. Trent boasted to a government witness that the narcotics he was selling were rendering people unconscious and, on at least one occasion, he forwarded photographs to another person of unconscious drug customers to demonstrate the potency of the drugs. The government’s investigation revealed that the defendants used firearms to protect their organization and distribution chain from rivals. Search warrants executed at the time of the defendants’ arrests resulted in the recovery of a substance that field-tested positive for heroin, a handgun, two shotguns and United States currency.
If convicted, the defendants face a maximum sentence of lifetime imprisonment.
The charges in the indictment are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Long Island Division. Assistant United States Attorneys Christopher C. Caffarone and Mark E. Misorek, and Special Assistant United States Attorney Jacob T. Kubetz are in charge of the prosecution.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
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
PORTLAND, Ore.— Billy J. Williams, U.S. Attorney for the District of Oregon, and Russ Burger, U.S. Marshal for the District of Oregon, provide the below statement on ongoing violence in Portland:
The U.S. Marshal will not cancel the cross-deputation of local and state law enforcement officers. Law enforcement and law-abiding citizens of Portland have endured months of nightly criminal violence and destruction. Officers have been repeatedly assaulted with bottles, bats, sledgehammers, lasers, rocks, and other weapons of convenience. In addition, the public has seen repeated efforts by criminals to burn down public buildings. These violent, senseless, and criminal acts have no bearing on social justice. They only serve to exacerbate lawlessness in this city. Federal cross-deputation of Oregon State Police, Multnomah County Sheriff and Portland Police Bureau personnel underscores the importance of providing accountability and deterrence for these criminal acts. Importantly, the federal deputation supports front line law enforcement officers and their families in a way that they have not seen from City Hall. Portlanders, and Oregonians in general aresick of the boarded-up and dangerous conditions prevalent in downtown Portland due to a lack of leadership. We call upon citizens of this city and state to denounce violence, demand accountability, and work together to end the violence.
SALT LAKE CITY – Two Utah cases are included in a national health care fraud enforcement action announced Thursday morning by the U.S. Department of Justice.
“We take these health care cases very seriously in Utah. Patients must be able to rely on their doctors to provide them with proper care and legitimate, FDA-approved drugs,” U.S. Attorney John W. Huber said today. “Additionally, health care providers who submits claims to government programs like Medicare and Medicaid must abide by the rules and regulations those programs have in place, including maintaining treatment records and conducting accurate billing. These crimes exploit patients and fleece American taxpayers,” Huber said.
Federal prosecutors in Salt Lake City filed a one-count misdemeanor information Tuesday charging Living for Life MD, LLC, doing business as SLC Med Spa, with receipt and delivery of adulterated devices. The Information alleges the Salt Lake City business imported non-FDA approved drugs manufactured overseas from an unauthorized distributor and administered them to patients. The foreign-sourced devices, specifically products labeled as Juvederm Ultra 2 were adulterated and lacked pre-market approval required under federal law.
The Information includes a notice of intent to seek a forfeiture money judgment of $250,000 representing the value of the misbranded devices. A summons will be issued to the company to appear in federal court on the charges. Special agents with the FDA Office of Criminal Investigations are investigating the case.
In the second case, a grand jury returned an indictment Wednesday charging Colette Krum Kolesar, age 48, of Spanish Fork, Utah, with one count of destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in a federal investigation. Kolesar worked for a home health and hospice center with an office in Provo.
The indictment alleges the defendant altered medical records, including therapy notices from nursing visits, with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence an investigation being conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The potential maximum penalty for the charge in the indictment is 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. A summon will be issued to Kolesar to appear on the charges in the indictment. The Utah Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and special agents with the FBI and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services are investigating the case.
Informations and indictments are not findings of guilt. Individuals charged in these documents are presumed innocent unless or until proven guilty in court.
NATIONAL HEALTH CARE FRAUD TAKEDOWN RESULTS IN CHARGES AGAINST 601 INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR OVER $2 BILLION IN FRAUD LOSSES
Largest Health Care Fraud Enforcement Action in Department of Justice History Resulted in 76 Doctors Charged and 84 Opioid Cases Involving More Than 13 Million Illegal Dosages of Opioids
WASHINGTON - Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex M. Azar III, announced today the largest ever health care fraud enforcement action involving 601 charged defendants across 58 federal districts, including 165 doctors, nurses and other licensed medical professionals, for their alleged participation in health care fraud schemes involving more than $2 billion in false billings.
Of those charged, 162 defendants, including 76 doctors, were charged for their roles in prescribing and distributing opioids and other dangerous narcotics. Thirty state Medicaid Fraud Control Units also participated in today’s arrests. In addition, HHS announced today that from July 2017 to the present, it has excluded 2,700 individuals from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all other Federal health care programs, which includes 587 providers excluded for conduct related to opioid diversion and abuse.
Attorney General Sessions and Secretary Azar were joined in the announcement by Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Deputy Director David L. Bowdich of the FBI, Assistant Administrator John Martin of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Deputy Inspector General Gary Cantrell of the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG), Deputy Chief Eric Hylton of IRS Criminal Investigation (CI), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Deputy Administrator and Director of the Center for Program Integrity Alec Alexander and Director Dermot F. O’Reilly of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS).
Today’s enforcement actions were led and coordinated by the Criminal Division, Fraud Section’s Health Care Fraud Unit in conjunction with its Medicare Fraud Strike Force (MFSF) partners, a partnership between the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Offices, the FBI and HHS-OIG. In addition, the operation includes the participation of the DEA, DCIS, IRS-CI, Department of Labor, other various federal law enforcement agencies, and State Medicaid Fraud Control Units.
The charges announced today aggressively target schemes billing Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE (a health insurance program for members and veterans of the armed forces and their families), and private insurance companies for medically unnecessary prescription drugs and compounded medications that often were never even purchased and/or distributed to beneficiaries. The charges also involve individuals contributing to the opioid epidemic, with a particular focus on medical professionals involved in the unlawful distribution of opioids and other prescription narcotics, a particular focus for the Department. According to the CDC, approximately 115 Americans die every day of an opioid-related overdose.
“Health care fraud is a betrayal of vulnerable patients, and often it is theft from the taxpayer,” said Attorney General Sessions. “In many cases, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists take advantage of people suffering from drug addiction in order to line their pockets. Theseare despicable crimes. That’s why this Department of Justice has taken historic new steps to go after fraudsters, including hiring more prosecutors and leveraging the power of data analytics. Today the Department of Justice is announcing the largest health care fraud enforcement action in American history. This is the most fraud, the most defendants, and the most doctors ever charged in a single operation—and we have evidence that our ongoing work has stopped or prevented billions of dollars’ worth of fraud. I want to thank our fabulous partners with the FBI, DEA, our Health Care Fraud task forces, HHS, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, IRS Criminal Investigation, Medicare, and especially the more than 1,000 federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement officers from across America who made this possible. By every measure we are more effective at finding and prosecuting medical fraud than ever.”
“Every dollar recovered in this year’s operation represents not just a taxpayer’s hard-earned money—it’s a dollar that can go toward providing healthcare for Americans in need,” said HHS Secretary Azar. “This year’s Takedown Day is a significant accomplishment for the American people, and every public servant involved should be proud of their work.”
According to court documents, the defendants allegedly participated in schemes to submit claims to Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and private insurance companies for treatments that were medically unnecessary and often never provided. In many cases, patient recruiters, beneficiaries and other co-conspirators were allegedly paid cash kickbacks in return for supplying beneficiary information to providers, so that the providers could then submit fraudulent bills to Medicare. Collectively, the doctors, nurses, licensed medical professionals, health care company owners and others charged are accused of submitting a total of over $2 billion in fraudulent billings. The number of medical professionals charged is particularly significant, because virtually every health care fraud scheme requires a corrupt medical professional to be involved in order for Medicare or Medicaid to pay the fraudulent claims. Aggressively pursuing corrupt medical professionals not only has a deterrent effect on other medical professionals, but also ensures that their licenses can no longer be used to bilk the system.
“Healthcare fraud touches every corner of the United States and not only costs taxpayers money, but also can have deadly consequences,” said FBI Deputy Director Bowdich. “Through investigations across the country, we have seen medical professionals putting greed above their patients’ well-being and trusted doctors fanning the flames of the opioid crisis. I want to thank the agents, analysts and our law enforcement partners in every field office who work each and every day to stop these criminals and hold them accountable for their actions.”
“DEA is committed to ending the opioid crisis occurring in our communities and preventing prescription drug misuse,” said DEA Assistant Administrator Martin. “DEA will continue to work with our partners every day to protect our citizens while ensuring that patients have adequate access to these critical medications.”
“This year’s operations, focusing on opioid-related schemes, spotlight the far-reaching impact of health care fraud,” said HHS Deputy Inspector General Cantrell. “Such crimes threaten the vitally important Medicare and Medicaid programs and the beneficiaries they serve. Though we have made significant progress in our fight against health care fraud; our efforts are not complete. We will continue to work with our partners to protect the health and safety of millions of Americans.”
“It takes a special kind of person to prey on the sick and vulnerable as happened in many of these health care fraud schemes,” said Deputy Chief Hylton. “Medical professionals and others callously placed individuals and vital healthcare services in harm’s way simply because of greed. IRS-CI special agents continue to work side-by-side with other federal, state and local law enforcement officers to uncover these schemes and hold these criminals accountable for their actions.”
“CMS makes it a top priority to protect the health and safety of millions of beneficiaries who depend on vital federal healthcare programs,” said Alec Alexander, deputy administrator and director of the Center for Program Integrity. “CMS’ Center for Program Integrity collaborates closely with our law enforcement partners to safeguard precious taxpayer dollars. Under Administrator Seema Verma, we will continue to strengthen this partnership with law enforcement in order to ensure the integrity and sustainability of these essential programs that serve millions of Americans.”
“Heath care fraud wounds our service members and veterans alike, as they rely upon and rightfully expect uncompromised care through the Department of Defense’s TRICARE Program,” said DCIS Director O’Reilly. “Investigations that culminated in enforcement actions over the past several days underscore the steadfast commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and our investigative partners to vigorously investigate fraud impacting TRICARE. We remain vigilant in our efforts to ensure the high standards of care our service members, military retirees, and their dependents deserve while safeguarding American taxpayer dollars.”
The Medicare Fraud Strike Force operations are part of a joint initiative between the Department of Justice and HHS to focus their efforts to prevent and deter fraud and enforce current anti-fraud laws around the country. The Medicare Fraud Strike Force operates in 10 locations nationwide. Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force has charged over 3,700 defendants who collectively have falsely billed the Medicare program for over $14 billion.
*********
For the Strike Force locations, in the Southern District of Florida, 124 defendants were charged with offenses relating to their participation in various fraud schemes involving over $337 million in false billings for services including home health care and pharmacy fraud. In one case, an owner, medical director, and two employees of a sober living facility were charged with conspiracy to commit health care and wire fraud, substantive counts of health care fraud, and substantive counts of money laundering. The indictment alleges a scheme that illegally recruited patients, paid kickbacks, and defrauded health care benefit programs for widespread fraudulent urine testing. During the course of the fraudulent scheme, the facility submitted more than $106 million in claims for substance abuse treatment services.
In the Central District of California, 33 defendants were charged for their roles in schemes to defraud insurance programs out of more than $660 million. For example, one indictment in a compounding pharmacy fraud case alleges an attorney/marketer paid kickbacks and offered incentives such as prostitutes and expensive meals to two podiatrists in exchange for prescriptions written on pre-printed prescription pads, regardless of the medical need for the prescriptions. Once the prescriptions were filled, members of the conspiracy submitted approximately $250 million in fraudulent claims to federal, state, and private insurers for the compounded drugs.
In the Southern District of Texas, 48 individuals were charged in cases involving more than $291 million in alleged fraud. Among these defendants are a pharmacy chain owner, managing partner, and lead pharmacist charged with a drug and money laundering conspiracy. According to the indictment, the coconspirators used fraudulent prescriptions to fill bulk orders for over one million pills of hydrocodone and oxycodone, which the pharmacy, in turn, sold to drug couriers for millions of dollars. In the Northern District of Texas, a home health agency owner was arrested on a criminal complaint for a $2.6 million health care fraud scheme.
In the Eastern District of Michigan, 35 defendants face charges for their alleged roles in fraud, kickback, money laundering and drug diversion schemes involving approximately $197 million in false claims for services that were medically unnecessary or never rendered. In one case, a physician was charged in separate kickback conspiracies with two home health agency owners, which resulted in more than $12 million in fraudulent insurance billings.
In the Northern District of Illinois, 21 individuals were charged for various fraud schemes involving home health and dental services. These schemes involved allegedly over $54 million in fraudulent billing. One case alleges a home health fraud and kickback conspiracy, which resulted in more than $32 million paid by Medicare based on the fraudulent billings.
In the Eastern District of New York, 13 individuals were charged with participating in a variety of schemes including kickbacks, services not rendered, identity theft and money laundering involving over $38 million in fraudulent billings. For example, the owner of a Brooklyn ambulette company was charged in a $7 million conspiracy stemming from the alleged payment of kickbacks for the referral of patients, who subjected themselves to purported physical and occupational therapy and other services, and were transported by the ambulette company.
In the Middle District of Florida, 13 individuals were charged with participating in a variety of schemes involving more than $21 million in fraudulent billings. In one case, a physician and clinic owner were charged with a conspiracy to defraud Medicare of more than $2.8 million for fraudulent home health billings.
In the Southern Louisiana Strike Force, operating in the Middle and Eastern Districts of Louisiana as well as the Southern District of Mississippi, 42 defendants were charged in connection with health care fraud, drug diversion, and money laundering schemes involving more than $16 million in fraudulent billings. One case alleges that three pharmacy owners and a nurse practitioner conspired to unlawfully dispense controlled substances and defraud TRICARE and private insurance companies out of $12 million.
In the Corporate Strike Force, five defendants were charged in the Middle District of Tennessee with a kickback conspiracy at a durable medical equipment company, which allegedly resulted in more than $1 million in kickbacks and over $2.5 million in fraudulent billings to Medicare.
*********
In addition to the Strike Force locations, today’s enforcement actions include cases and investigations brought by an additional 46 U.S. Attorney’s Offices, including the execution of search warrants in various investigations conducted by the Central and Northern Districts of California, Middle District of Florida, Southern District of Georgia, Western District of Kentucky, Eastern District of Michigan, Western District of North Carolina, Eastern and Western Districts of Texas, Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia, and Western District of Washington.
In the Northern and Southern Districts of Alabama, 15 defendants were charged for their roles in eight health care fraud schemes involving compounding pharmacy fraud and unlawful distribution of controlled substances.
In the Eastern District of California, four defendants were charged for their roles in two health care fraud schemes, one of which included forged prescriptions.
In the Southern District of California, seven defendants, including a physician, were charged for their roles in three health care fraud schemes and one scheme involving identity theft and services that were not rendered.
In the District of Colorado, a defendant was charged with health care fraud related to billings to Medicaid and Medicare.
In the District of Connecticut, three defendants, including two medical professionals, were charged for their roles in two schemes involving compounding drugs and unlawful distribution of Schedule II and IV controlled substances.
In the District of Delaware, a physician/owner of a pain management clinic was charged with unlawfully prescribing more than two million dosage units of Oxycodone products.
In the District of Columbia, a durable medical equipment company owner was charged with defrauding Medicaid of $9.8 million.
In the Northern District of Florida, four defendants were charged in a scheme to defraud TRICARE and other private insurance companies out of over $8 million for medically unnecessary compounded creams and pills.
In the Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Georgia, 12 defendants, including two physicians, were charged in nine health care fraud, drug diversion, or compounding pharmacy schemes involving over $13.5 million in fraudulent billings.
In the District of Idaho, three defendants, all of who are medical professionals, were charged for their roles in three separate fraud schemes involving controlled substances.
In the Central and Southern Districts of Illinois, seven defendants were charged in six separate schemes to defraud the Medicaid program.
In the Northern District of Indiana, eight defendants were charged in various health care fraud schemes to defraud both the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
In the Northern District of Iowa, two defendants – both medical professionals – were charged for their roles in two opioid-related schemes.
In the Districts of Kansas and the Northern and Western Districts of Oklahoma, 12 defendants, including four physicians, were charged in various unlawful distribution of controlled substances schemes. In the Western District of Oklahoma, one case marks the district’s first time charging unlawful distribution of controlled substances resulting in a death.
In the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky, 12 defendants, including five medical professionals, were charged in various schemes involving health care fraud, unlawful distribution of controlled substances, aggravated identity theft, and money laundering. One case involved the operation of two false-front medical clinics.
In the Districts of Maine and Vermont, two defendants were charged for their roles in two schemes to defraud various government programs including Medicare, Medicaid, and ones run by the HHS’ Administration for Children and Families.
In the District of Nebraska, seven defendants, including one physician, were charged in five separate schemes to defraud Medicare, Medicaid, and various HHS programs.
In the District of Nevada, four defendants, including three medical professionals were charged with conspiracies to commit health care fraud and distribute controlled substances.
In the District of New Jersey, eight defendants, including a New York doctor, an anesthesiology technologist for a Philadelphia hospital, and the owner of a medical billing company, were charged for their roles in five schemes to defraud private insurance companies of over $16 million.
In the Southern District of New York, two defendants were charged in schemes involving health care fraud or drug diversion.
In the Middle District of North Carolina, two defendants were charged with a conspiracy to defraud Medicare out of over $4 million.
In the Southern District of Ohio, three defendants – all medical professionals – were charged for their roles in two health care fraud schemes, one of which involved illegal drug distribution and kickbacks.
In the Eastern and Middle Districts of Pennsylvania, 12 defendants were charged for their roles in three drug diversion schemes.
In the Western District of Pennsylvania, four defendants – all physicians – were charged in various health care fraud and drug diversion schemes. One scheme involved 32,000 dosage units of buprenorphine.
In the District of Rhode Island, one defendant was charged for participating in a theft and aggravated identity theft scheme.
In the District of South Carolina, three defendants were charged for their separate roles in a conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute fentanyl.
In the District of South Dakota, two defendants were charged in separate cases, one of which involved a scheme to defraud the Indian Health Service.
In the Middle District of Tennessee, 10 defendants were charged in two separate schemes, including a conspiracy to fraudulently obtain oxycodone.
In the Eastern District of Texas, two defendants were charged for their role in health care fraud schemes to defraud the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
In the Western District of Virginia, eight defendants were charged for their alleged roles in health care fraud schemes. One $45 million scheme to defraud Medicaid involved falsification of documents in patient files.
In the Eastern District of Washington, a dentist and another individual were indicted for distributing and conspiring to distribute hydrocodone and tramadol without a legitimate medical purpose.
In the Eastern District of Wisconsin, three defendants were charged in a scheme involving the unlawful distribution of controlled substances and aggravated identity theft.
In addition, in the states of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, and Washington, 97 defendants have been charged with defrauding the Medicaid program out of over $27 million. These cases were investigated by each state’s respective Medicaid Fraud Control Units. In addition, the Medicaid Fraud Control Units of the states of California, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Tennessee, and Virginia participated in the investigation of many of the federal cases discussed above.
The cases announced today are being prosecuted and investigated by U.S. Attorney’s Offices nationwide, along with Medicare Fraud Strike Force teams from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and from the U.S. Attorney’s Offices in the District of Utah, Southern District of Florida, Eastern District of Michigan, Eastern District of New York, Southern District of Texas, Central District of California, Eastern District of Louisiana, Northern District of Texas, Northern District of Illinois, Middle District of Louisiana, and the Middle District of Florida; and agents from the FBI, HHS-OIG, DEA, DCIS, IRS-CI, Department of Labor, other various federal law enforcement agencies, and state Medicaid Fraud Control Units.
A complaint, information, or indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Additional documents related to this announcement will shortly be available here:
This operation also highlights the great work being done by the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. In the past fiscal year, the Department of Justice, including the Civil Division, has collectively won or negotiated over $2 billion in judgments and settlements related to matters alleging health care fraud.
CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – A former nursing assistant was sentenced today in federal court for murder and assault charges in the deaths of eight veterans at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Clarksburg, West Virginia, Acting U.S. Attorney Randolph J. Bernard announced.
Reta Mays, 46, of Harrison County, West Virginia, was sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences, one for each murder, and an additional 240 months for the eight victim. Mays pleaded guilty in July 2020 to seven counts of second-degree murder in the deaths of veterans Robert Edge Sr., Robert Kozul, Archie Edgell, George Shaw, W.A.H., Felix McDermott, and Raymond Golden. She pleaded guilty to one count of assault with intent to commit murder involving the death of veteran Russell Posey.
“In a case where we are confronted with the horrific crimes committed by the defendant against those who gave so much of themselves to serve this country, justice is somewhat of an elusive concept. No amount of prison time will erase the pain and loss that the families of these eight brave and honorable men have experienced. These men are heroes in our community, state, and country, and deserved so much more,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Bernard. “Mays will now spend every minute of the rest of her life where she belongs, in prison.”
Mays was employed as a nursing assistant at the VAMC, working the night shift during the same period of time that the veterans in her care died of hypoglycemia while being treated at the hospital. Nursing assistants at the VAMC are not qualified or authorized to administer any medication to patients, including insulin. Mays would sit one-on-one with patients. She admitted to administering insulin to several patients with the intent to cause their deaths.
“While responsibility for these heinous criminal acts lies with Reta Mays, an extensive healthcare inspection by our office found the facility had serious and pervasive clinical and administrative failures that contributed to them going undetected,” said VA Inspector General Michael J. Missal. “I hope that the victims’ families can find some measure of solace knowing that Mays was caught and punished, and that steps are being taken to help ensure other families do not suffer the same loss. I would like to thank the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the FBI, and the West Virginia State Police for their strong partnership throughout this complex investigation.”
“It is beyond disturbing that someone would seek out the opportunity to work as a medical professional to aid the sick, and then twist their duty and willingly end the life of their patients,” said FBI Pittsburgh Acting Special Agent in Charge Carlton Peeples. “I hope today’s sentence brings peace and closure to the families of these veterans. It certainly sends the message that when you break the trust you are given and, in the process break the law, there are consequences, no matter who you are or what your profession is.”
This investigation, which began in June 2018, involved more than 300 interviews; the review of thousands of pages of medical records and charts; the review of phone, social media, and computer records; countless hours of consulting with some of the most respected forensic experts and endocrinologists; the exhumation of some of the victims; and the review of hospital staff and visitor records to assess their potential interactions with the victims. Today’s sentence was the result of the tireless and comprehensive efforts of both criminal investigators and healthcare experts.
Mays was also ordered to pay a total of $172,624.96 to the victims’ families, the VA Hospital, Medicare, and insurance companies.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jarod J. Douglas and Brandon S. Flower prosecuted the case on behalf of the government. The Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General and the FBI investigated. The West Virginia State Police and the Greater Harrison Drug & Violent Crimes Task Force, a HIDTA-funded initiative, assisted.
CONCORD - James Goodwin, 53, of Northwood, was sentenced on Tuesday to 70 months in federal prison for possession of child pornography, United States Attorney Scott W. Murray announced today.
According to court documents and statements made in court, in the fall of 2018, a North Carolina undercover police officer was conducting an online investigation into individuals involved in the trading of illegal images of child pornography. Goodwin was identified after he uploaded numerous images of child sexual abuse into a chatroom which were downloaded by the undercover officer. Forensic examinations of several of Goodwin’s electronic devices revealed images depicting the sexual assaults of children.
“The law enforcement community is committed to protecting children,” said U.S. Attorney Murray. “Innocent children are victimized when child pornography is created. Those who trade or distribute these images exacerbate that harm and will be held accountable for their conduct.”
“By viewing and distributing these images, Goodwin re-victimized these innocent child victims who were abused in the original production of such images.” said Jason J. Molina, acting special agent in charge of HSI Boston. “Together with our federal and local partners, HSI remains dedicated to combatting the threat that depraved, online child predators like Goodwin pose. We will never waiver in our commitment to fighting for justice for the victims of those who traffic in thesesickening images.”
This matter was investigated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations. The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Georgiana L. Konesky.
In February 2006, the Department of Justice introduced Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative designed to protect children from online exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorney’s Offices, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
###
CONCORD - James Goodwin, 53, of Northwood, pleaded guilty in federal court to possession of child pornography, United States Attorney Scott W. Murray announced today.
According to court documents and statements made in court, in the fall of 2018, a North Carolina undercover police officer was conducting an online investigation into individuals involved in the trading of illegal images of child pornography. Goodwin was identified after he uploaded numerous images of child sexual abuse into a chatroom which were downloaded by the undercover officer. Forensic examinations of several of Goodwin’s electronic devices revealed images depicting the sexual assaults of children.
Goodwin is scheduled to be sentenced on October 22nd 2019.
“Protecting the innocence of children is one of the highest priorities of law enforcement,” said U.S. Attorney Murray. “We work closely with our law enforcement partners to identify and prosecute those who commit crimes related to child pornography.”
This matter was investigated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Georgiana L. Konesky.
In February 2006, the Department of Justice introduced Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative designed to protect children from online exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorney’s Offices, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
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
ALEXANDRIA, La. – Acting United States Attorney Alexander C. Van Hook announced that Daniel Perryman Collins, 34, of Pineville, Louisiana, has been sentenced by United States District Judge Dee D. Drell to 325 months in prison, followed by 5 years of supervised release, on child pornography charges. This case is the result of an investigation into individuals using the dark web to communicate with others regarding exploiting children on the internet and causing them to produce child pornography. From January to November 2023, Collins and his co-defendant, Michael Bo Peacock, both together and individually, for their sexual gratification, caused minor children to produce child pornographic and sexually explicit images and videos of themselves by the use of threats and blackmail. Collins conducted all of this illegal activity in Pineville, Louisiana, while Peacock was located in the Dallas, Texas area. According to information introduced in court, Collins and Peacock both participated in meeting children and coercing/blackmailing the children to engage in sexually explicit conduct and to produce videos of that conduct. Peacock would often contact a minor victim online and through various social media platforms, including SnapChat, and he and Collins would convince the minor victim to engage in sexually explicit activity and provide a video of that conduct. Collins and Peacock would then blackmail and threaten the victims to provide additional sexually explicit material. As part of the conspiracy, Collins utilized advanced security measures so that those images and materials could not be traced back to himself or Peacock. Collins and Peacock gave each other access to all of the child pornography they had caused minor victims to produce by obtaining an account with an overseas cloud-based file hosting service, so they could post and share the child pornography images and videos that they had produced or obtained. Both defendants had an encryption key to use to access the material they had posted to the site. Through their investigation, agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) Child Exploitation Operational Unit determined that Collins and Peacock exploited over 100 child victims and caused them to create child pornography. These images and videos were posted to their shared file hosting account.On November 16, 2023, a search warrant was executed at Collins’ residence in Pineville. During the search, law enforcement agents obtained access to the cloud-based file hosting account of Collins and Peacock and were able to download all of the child pornography images and videos which they had created and posted to the account. Collins pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to produce child pornography and one count of enticing a minor to engage in criminal sexual activity on November 21, 2024. Peacock pleaded guilty to the same charges on December 23, 2024, and will be sentenced at a later date. “The sexual exploitation of minor children and the activities that these men participated in is horrendous and sickening,” said Acting United States Attorney Alexander C. Van Hook. “These types of cases are becoming more prevalent in the United States and internationally and can happen in your own neighborhood. We encourage parents to be vigilant in keeping an eye out for any suspicious activity that your children could potentially be exposed to. We will continue to work to uncover this type of illegal activity and protect our minor children from offenders like this.”“Through relentless investigations and cutting-edge technology, the FBI works every day to uncover hidden networks, identify victims and bring perpetrators to justice,” said FBI Criminal Investigative Division Assistant Director Chad Yarbrough. “Today’s sentencing sends the message that the FBI is committed to protecting vulnerable lives and ensuring no predator can thrive at the expense of our children.”The case was investigated by the FBI’s Headquarter-based Child Exploitation Operation Unit, with assistance from the FBI’s New Orleans and Dallas Field Offices, and prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Danny Siefker.To report an incident involving the possession, distribution, receipt or production of child pornography: Child sexual abuse material – referred to in legal terms as "child pornography" – captures the sexual abuse and exploitation of children. These images document victims’ exploitation and abuse, and they suffer revictimization every time the images are viewed. In 2023, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children received 36 million reports of the possession, manufacture, or distribution of child sexual abuse materials. To file a report with NCMEC, go to https://report.cybertip.org or call 1-800-843-5678. # # #
Montgomery, Ala. – On Tuesday, May 9, 2017, Dr. Robert M. Ritchea, 54, of LaGrange, Georgia, was sentenced to serve 10 years in prison for operating a “pill mill” through his medical practice and for money laundering, announced Acting United States Attorney A. Clark Morris. A “pill mill” is a medical clinic created to dispense controlled substances inappropriately, unlawfully, and for non-medical reasons.
According to court documents, Dr. Ritchea operated a family medical practice in Phenix City, Alabama. At that practice, Dr. Ritchea wrote prescriptions for Schedule II controlled substances, including oxycodone, hydrocodone, methadone, and hydromorphone, knowing that his patients did not actually need the drugs prescribed. Dr. Ritchea laundered the proceeds of his unlawful drug dealing by purchasing Schedule II pain medications—specifically, hydromorphone and hydrocodone—directly from a drug manufacturer. Dr. Ritchea then distributed the pills directly out of his medical practice. This was necessary to keep his “pill mill” operational since many pharmacists in and around Phenix City refused to fill the illegitimate and unlawful prescriptions Dr. Ritchea wrote.
At the sentencing hearing, the Government introduced evidence that, in at least one case, one of Dr. Ritchea’s patients died as a result of a methadone overdose just days after receiving a prescription for that drug from Dr. Ritchea.
The sentencing court also heard testimony from former patients of Dr. Ritchea’s who had maintained their addictions to prescription drugs by obtaining monthly prescriptions from him. These patients testified that they made cash payments to Dr. Ritchea of at least $150 each month in exchange for office visits and prescriptions. The patients described the horrible impact the addiction had on their lives and families.
Additionally, members of the medical community in the Phenix City-Columbus area testified. A pharmacist described the unusually large prescriptions Dr. Ritchea’s patients brought to his pharmacy. A physician who operated an addiction rehabilitation clinic told the court that he had given his patients an ultimatum—they could not remain in his rehabilitation program if they were simultaneously receiving prescription drugs from Dr. Ritchea.
When he imposed the sentence, Chief United States District Judge W. Keith Watkins told Dr. Ritchea that his conduct was not far removed from the conduct of a drug dealer operating on a street corner. The judge also stressed the need to deter other doctors from overprescribing prescription drugs. The 120-month sentence reflects one of the largest ever imposed by a federal judge in Alabama on a doctor for operating a pill mill.
“The abuse of opiates destroys careers, divides families, severs relationships, and, as we saw in this case, it takes lives,” said Acting United States Attorney Morris. “In exchange for monthly cash payments, Dr. Ritchea poured poison into his community. Society trusted Dr. Ritchea to care for the sick, not make people sick. Dr. Ritchea violated that trust and the harm he caused was immense. I believe the ten-year sentence was certainly justified.”
“IRS-CI, in conjunction with the United States Attorney’s Office in the Middle District of Alabama, our local and federal partners, is dedicated to eradicating pill mill operations,” stated Acting Special Agent in Charge, James E. Dorsey of IRS-Criminal Investigations. “The prescriptions obtained from pill mill clinics are most often sold or diverted on the streets feeding this epidemic and devastating communities. The laundering of these illegal profits enriches those who perpetuate the scheme. IRS-CI will remain committed to investigating those entrusted with patient well-being, who seek self-enrichment by promoting substance abuse through pill mills.”
“Opiate abuse is a major problem across the Nation, including throughout the Middle District of Alabama,” said DEA Assistant Special Agent in Charge Bret Hamilton. “The diversion of prescription pain medication contributes to the widespread abuse of opiates, is a gateway to heroin addiction, and is devastating our communities. This investigation demonstrates the strength of collaborative law enforcement efforts and our strong partnership with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to aggressively pursue anyone that illicitly distributes these drugs. And this sentencing is evidence to how egregious federal courts view these charges."
This case was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Tactical Diversion Squad and the Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigations Division (IRS-CI), with assistance from the Opelika Police Department, the Chambers County Drug Task Force, the Auburn Police Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, the Russell County Sheriff’s Office, the Lawrence County Sheriff’s Office, and the Alabama Board of Medical Examiners.
Assistant United States Attorneys Jonathan S. Ross and R. Rand Neeley prosecuted the case.
The Justice Department, together with numerous law enforcement partners, met today at the Memphis Police Department’s (MPD) Real Time Crime Center to announce a new initiative to surge law enforcement tools and resources to target gangs and other violent groups who are threatening and upending the safety and security of communities in Memphis.
“Violent crime deprives communities of a fundamental sense of security in their own homes and neighborhoods,” said Acting Assistant Attorney Nicole M. Argentieri of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This violent crime initiative will bring additional tools and resources used to investigate and prosecute violent crime and apply those tools to gangs and groups who are harming and disrupting communities here in Memphis.”
The new initiative includes federal prosecutors from the Violent Crime and Racketeering Section, the nation’s foremost experts in charging federal racketeering (RICO) crimes, as well as Assistant U.S. Attorneys already working in Memphis and dedicated investigative agents, analysts, and forensic experts from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), FBI, U.S. Marshals Service, and MPD.
“Through data-driven, targeted, and focused enforcement against the worst-of-the-worst violent criminals and organized groups, coupled with a strong focus on crime prevention, intervention, and reentry, I believe all of us, working together, can make an incredible difference and secure a safer future for all of Memphis,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri.
“As U.S. Attorney and a lifelong Memphian, I know the citizens of this city aresick and tired of gun violence and violent crime,” said U.S. Attorney Kevin G. Ritz for the Western District of Tennessee. “I am too. The threat from organized criminal enterprises requires that we bring significant resources to bear. These additional prosecutors, working hand-in-hand with our office’s experienced Assistant U.S. Attorneys and law enforcement partners, will build cases against gang members, trigger-pullers, and shot-callers.”
The initiative will also include efforts to invest in prevention and intervention, and the department will work with the Western District of Tennessee’s innovative Reentry Court Program and community organizations to assist offenders in reentering and reintegrating into their communities. As part of the announcement, Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri and U.S. Attorney Ritz met with community members to hear directly from them about the violence and gang activity in their neighborhoods.
“Initiatives like this are not about one takedown – they’re about working in partnership to build a long term and sustainable plan to fight gun crime. ATF Memphis does that every day,” said ATF Director Steven M. Dettelbach. “This summer, with the MPD and other state, local, and federal partners, we focused efforts here, using crime gun intelligence to help protect the people of this great city. Now we are here with additional partners both locally and nationally to continue that work – that impact. By combining traditional investigative techniques with advancements in technology, ATF is creating data-driven investigations that turn into evidence-driven prosecutions of the most dangerous offenders.
“This violent crime initiative serves as a force multiplier to empower law enforcement, our partners, and communities to proactively fight against violent crime in big cities and small towns across our nation,” said Executive Assistant Director Timothy Langan of the FBI’s Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch. “The FBI, in close collaboration with the Justice Department and our law enforcement partners, is committed to tackling violent crime threats in a methodical and effective approach to dismantle the roots of crime and reclaim our communities, for a promising future for our neighborhoods.”
“FBI Memphis, our dedicated special agents, task force officers, intelligence analysts, and professional staff are ready to join our partners in supporting this new initiative to disrupt and dismantle the criminal enterprises that are threatening our communities," said Special Agent in Charge Douglas DePodesta of the FBI Memphis Field Office. “Together we not only investigate and enforce the law, but we also live in, and are a part of the communities affected by the violent crime that is overwhelmingly the result of violent gangs. It is only together that we will be able to target and bring to prosecution the gang members and others who are driving violence in Memphis and throughout the area.”
“I am excited about the announcement by our U.S. Attorney Kevin Ritz regarding an increased focus on violent crime in the city of Memphis,” said MPD Chief Cerelyn “C.J.” Davis. “This new initiative is a positive step in the right direction, which fosters a since of renewed hope for improved quality of life for our citizens and visitors.”
Joining Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri and U.S. Attorney Ritz in the press conference today were ATF Director Dettelbach, MPD Assistant Chief Shawn Jones, and FBI Special Agent in Charge DePodesta.
INDIANAPOLIS- Mario Parker, 22, of Brownsburg, Indiana, has been sentenced to nine years in federal prison after pleading guilty to possession of child sexual abuse material.
According to court documents, in June of 2021, investigators discovered that an individual living in California had been sharing sexually explicit images and videos via the social media application Kik with someone later identified as Mario Parker. In chats over Kik, Parker learned that the individual from California worked in a daycare and had a sexual interest in children. Knowing that, Parker asked the daycare employee to distribute sexually explicit images and videos of the children in the daycare to Parker knowing that it would result in their sexual exploitation. In one of the Kik conversations, Parker admitted that he would like to adopt a daughter with the intention of raping her.
On June 30, 2022, officers executed a federal search warrant at Parker’s residence in Brownsburg and found a Samsung Galaxy cell phone. During a search of the phone, investigators located several graphic sexual abuse videos of children as young as three years old being forcefully tied down and raped by adult men, as well as videos depicting bestiality. In total, officers recovered thousands of images and approximately 889 videos of child sexual abuse from Parker’s cell phone and accounts.
In an interview with investigators, Parker admitted to using social media applications such as Kik, Snapchat, and Telegram to communicate about and share child sexual abuse material with users who shared his sexual interest in children.
“This pedophile revictimized hundreds of children across the world, many of whom we will never know. Even more disturbing, communicated with other like-minded criminals, sharing these horrific videos and their sick desires to perpetrate these abuses on even more children,” said Zachary A. Myers, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. “Sexual abuse of children is more widespread than decent people understand, especially the proliferation of abuse images online. Our federal prosecutors will continue to partner with the FBI to identify these criminals, and work to put them where they cannot harm any more of our children.”
The FBI investigated this case. The sentence was imposed by U.S. District Court Judge, Jane Magnus-Stinson. Judge Stinson also ordered that Parker be supervised by the U.S. Probation Office for ten years following his release from federal prison and pay $24,000 in restitution to victims.
U.S. Attorney Myers thanked Assistant United States Attorney Tiffany J. Preston, who prosecuted this case.
If you are a victim of child sexual exploitation, please contact your local police department. Resources for victims of child exploitation can be found on our website at https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdin/project-safe-childhood
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims.
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – A federal judge sentenced a Childersburg man yesterday for possession of child pornography, announced United States Attorney Prim F. Escalona and FBI Special Agent in Charge Johnnie Sharp, Jr.
United States District Judge R. David Proctor sentenced Seth Thompson, 41, to 168 months in prison followed by 240 months supervised release. In September 2020, Thompson pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography. This conviction will require him to register as a sex offender.
“Children are the most vulnerable victims and my Office will do everything in our power to prosecute criminals who victimize our children through the internet, videos, or photos,” U.S. Attorney Escalona said.
“I am pleased with the sentence handed down today that now holds Thompson accountable for thesesickening crimes,” SAC Sharp said. “I encourage anyone who may have information about possible child sexual exploitation, including posts on social media, to report it to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) at CyberTipline.org or by calling 1-800-THE-LOST. This case emphasizes the importance of concerned citizens making those reports.”
According to the plea agreement, law enforcement received Cyber-Tips from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children ("NCMEC") that images of child pornography had been uploaded to certain Facebook and Google accounts registered to Thompson. Thompson was located and arrested by Childersburg police on unrelated charges, and a federal search warrant was obtained for Thompson’s cell phones. During a forensic review of Thompson’s cell phones, a total of 153 images and 69 videos of children being sexually exploited were identified. Thompson admitted he had seen images of child pornography and that he had received certain images and videos in a Kik group.
The FBI investigated the case, along with Alabama Law Enforcement Agency and with the assistance of Childersburg Police Department. Assistant United States Attorney R. Leann White prosecuted the case.
The case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse, launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Today an additional defendant pled guilty in a long-running investigation into a prescription drug-billing scheme involving a Haleyville, Ala.-based pharmacy, Northside Pharmacy doing business as Global Compounding Pharmacy. U.S. Attorney Jay E. Town, Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent in Charge Johnnie Sharp, Jr., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General, Special Agent in Charge Derrick L. Jackson, Defense Criminal Investigative Service Special Agent in Charge Cynthia Bruce, United States Postal Inspector in Charge, Houston Division Adrian Gonzalez, and Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation Acting Special Agent in Charge Andrew Thornton announced the guilty plea.
John Jeremy Adams, 39 of Panama City Beach, Florida entered a guilty plea before U.S. District Judge L. Scott Coogler to one count of conspiring to commit health care and mail fraud, 16 counts of health care fraud, one count of conspiring to pay kickbacks to a prescriber, and seven counts of spending the proceeds of health care fraud. According to the plea agreement, Adams stipulated to a 10-year sentence.
Adams is the former owner and chief executive officer of Northside Pharmacy doing business as Global Compounding Pharmacy. Mr. Adam’s guilty plea brings the total number of defendants who have pled guilty in the larger investigation to 23. Those who have previously pled guilty include two nurse practitioners, the COO, a vice president of sales, an operations manager, a district manager, and multiple sales representatives. Trial against the four remaining defendants is set for June 29, 2020:
James A. Mays, III, 44 of Winfield, Alabama, a pharmacist, charged in 20 counts;
Jessica Linton, 37 of Clearwater, Florida, the manager of the billing team at Global, charged in 24 counts;
Lisa Holmes, 41 of Troy, Alabama, a district manager supervising sales representatives at Global, charged in 12 counts; and
John Gladden, 50, of Tallahassee, Florida, a district manager supervising sales representatives at Global, charged in nine counts.
“Our Office and partner agencies intend to investigate and prosecute all those who treat our health insurance plans as their personal piggy banks,” lead prosecutor Chinelo Diké-Minor said. “It may take time, but we intend to see that justice is done.”
“These defendants committed a reprehensible federal crime when they chose to steal funds designated to care for the sick,” United States Attorney Jay Town said. “Especially in this day and time where our health care system has the potential to be overwhelmed, we can ill afford to allow the wellness of many to be sacrificed by the greed of a few. I want to thank our partner agencies for their continued efforts to put a stop to health care fraud. We will continue to stand with them to not only uncover these frauds...but see them prosecuted in a federal courtroom.”
“It is sad to think that there are those who are so greedy they would steal from the sick,” FBI Special Agent in Charge Sharp said. “Today, Adam's has admitted to his greed and now, he along with his partners in crime, will be held accountable.”
“It’s more important than ever that we thoroughly investigate and bring to justice those who seek Federal health care programs as a way to line their own pockets,” said Derrick L. Jackson, Special Agent in Charge at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General in Atlanta. “Together with our law enforcement partners we will continue to flush out the health care fraud.”
"I trust this sentence sends a message to those who would exploit government programs intended to help current and former military members and their families," DCIS Special Agent in Charge Cynthia Bruce said. "The DCIS, with our law enforcement partnerships, will dedicate all the time that is needed and resources available to bring these offenders to justice."
“In addition to undermining public health and safety, health care fraud cheats Americans out of more than eighty billion dollars a year in higher premiums and increased out-of-pocket expenses,” said Adrian Gonzalez, Postal Inspector in Charge, Houston Division. “The United States Postal Inspection Service is committed to investigations with our law enforcement partners whenever health care fraudsters try to involve the U.S. Mail in their nefarious schemes, as in this case against John Jeremy Adams, who was doing business as Global Compounding Pharmacy.”
According to the plea agreement, Mr. Adams participated in a scheme to cause the pharmacy he co-owned to bill for medically unnecessary prescription drugs. He paid prescribers to issue prescriptions and directed employees to get medically unnecessary drugs for themselves, family members, and friends, to alter prescriptions to add non-prescribed drugs, to automatically refill prescriptions regardless of patient need, to routinely waive and discount co-pays to induce patients to obtain and retain medically unnecessary drugs, and to bill for drugs without patients’ knowledge. According to the plea agreement, when prescription drug administrators attempted to police this conduct, the defendants evaded and obstructed those efforts, including by providing false information in response to audits and diverting their billing through affiliated pharmacies. The scheme targeted multiple health insurance plans, including the pharmacy’s Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama plan, as well as plans providing health insurance to the elderly, disabled, members of the military, and veterans—Medicare, TRICARE, and CHAMPVA, among others.
According to the plea agreement, Mr. Adams as directed the scheme and also joked about it. It describes a text exchange between him and another defendant in which they discuss altering prescriptions. She tells him she will be getting him white out as a birthday gift, and he responds “Yep. Made us money.”
The maximum punishment for the 18 U.S.C. § 1349 health care and mail fraud conspiracy charge is 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The maximum penalty for health care fraud is 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The maximum penalty for the 18 U.S.C. § 371 kickback conspiracy charge is 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The maximum penalty for the 18 U.S.C. § 1957 spending statute charge is 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
The FBI, HHS-OIG, DCIS, USPIS, IRS-CI, investigated the cases, which Assistant U.S. Attorneys Chinelo Dike-Minor, Don Long, and Edward Canter are prosecuting. The Veteran Affairs Office of Inspector General Criminal Investigations Division provided assistance in the investigation.
Memphis, TN – The Justice Department, together with numerous law enforcement partners, met today at the Memphis Police Department’s (MPD) Real Time Crime Center to announce a new initiative to surge law enforcement tools and resources to target gangs and other violent groups who are threatening and upending the safety and security of communities in Memphis.
“Violent crime deprives communities of a fundamental sense of security in their own homes and neighborhoods,” said Acting Assistant Attorney Nicole M. Argentieri of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This violent crime initiative will bring additional tools and resources used to investigate and prosecute violent crime and apply those tools to gangs and groups who are harming and disrupting communities here in Memphis.”
The new initiative includes federal prosecutors from the Violent Crime and Racketeering Section, the nation’s foremost experts in charging federal racketeering (RICO) crimes, as well as Assistant U.S. Attorneys already working in Memphis and dedicated investigative agents, analysts, and forensic experts from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the MPD.
“Through data-driven, targeted, and focused enforcement against the worst-of-the-worst violent criminals and organized groups, coupled with a strong focus on crime prevention, intervention, and reentry, I believe all of us, working together, can make an incredible difference and secure a safer future for all of Memphis,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri.
“As U.S. Attorney and a lifelong Memphian, I know the citizens of this city aresick and tired of gun violence and violent crime,” said U.S. Attorney Kevin G. Ritz for the Western District of Tennessee. “I am too. The threat from organized criminal enterprises requires that we bring significant resources to bear. These additional prosecutors, working hand-in-hand our office’s experienced Assistant U.S. Attorneys and law enforcement partners, will build cases against gang members, trigger-pullers, and shot-callers.”
The initiative will also include efforts to invest in prevention and intervention, and the department will work with the Western District of Tennessee’s innovative Reentry Court Program and community organizations to assist offenders in reentering and reintegrating into their communities. As part of the announcement, Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri and U.S. Attorney Ritz met with community members to hear directly from them about the violence and gang activity in their neighborhoods.
“Initiatives like this are not about one takedown – they’re about working in partnership to build a long term and sustainable plan to fight gun crime. ATF Memphis does that every day,” said ATF Director Steven M. Dettelbach. “This summer, with the MPD and other state, local, and federal partners, we focused efforts here, using crime gun intelligence to help protect the people of this great city. Now we are here with additional partners both locally and nationally to continue that work -- that impact. By combining traditional investigative techniques with advancements in technology, ATF is creating data-driven investigations that turn into evidence-driven prosecutions of the most dangerous offenders.
“This violent crime initiative serves as a force multiplier to empower law enforcement, our partners, and communities to proactively fight against violent crime in big cities and small towns across our nation,” said Executive Assistant Director Timothy Langan of the FBI’s Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch. “The FBI, in close collaboration with the Justice Department and our law enforcement partners, is committed to tackling violent crime threats in a methodical and effective approach to dismantle the roots of crime and reclaim our communities, for a promising future for our neighborhoods.”
“FBI Memphis, our dedicated special agents, task force officers, intelligence analysts, and professional staff are ready to join our partners in supporting this new initiative to disrupt and dismantle the criminal enterprises that are threatening our communities," said Special Agent in Charge Douglas DePodesta of the FBI Memphis Field Office. “Together we not only investigate and enforce the law, but we also live in, and are a part of the communities affected by the violent crime that is overwhelmingly the result of violent gangs. It is only together that we will be able to target and bring to prosecution the gang members and others who are driving violence in Memphis and throughout the area.”
“I am excited about the announcement by our U.S. Attorney Kevin Ritz regarding an increased focus on violent crime in the city of Memphis,” said MPD Chief Cerelyn “C.J.” Davis. “This new initiative is a positive step in the right direction, which fosters a since of renewed hope for improved quality of life for our citizens and visitors.”
Joining Acting Assistant Attorney General Argentieri and U.S. Attorney Ritz in the press conference today were ATF Director Dettelbach, MPD Assistant Chief Shawn Jones, and FBI Special Agent in Charge DePodesta.
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
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
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
HOUSTON – Twenty-one members of a massive India-based fraud and money laundering conspiracy that defrauded thousands of U.S. residents of hundreds of millions of dollars were sentenced this week to terms of imprisonment up to 20 years. Three other conspirators were sentenced earlier this year for laundering proceeds for the conspiracy, which was operated out of India-based call centers that targeted U.S. residents in various telephone fraud schemes. This week’s sentencing hearings took place in Houston before the Honorable David Hittner of the Southern District of Texas.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions of the U.S. Department of Justice, Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Ryan Patrick of the Southern District of Texas, Acting Executive Associate Director Derek N. Benner of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Inspector General J. Russell George of the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), and Special Agent in Charge David Green of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) made the announcement today.
“The stiff sentences imposed this week represent the culmination of the first-ever large scale, multi-jurisdiction prosecution targeting the India call center scam industry,” said Sessions. “This case represents one of the most significant victories to date in our continuing efforts to combat elder fraud and the victimization of the most vulnerable members of the U.S. public. The transnational criminal ring of fraudsters and money launderers who conspired to bilk older Americans, legal immigrants and many others out of their life savings through their lies, threats and financial schemes must recognize that all resources at the Department’s disposal will be deployed to shut down these telefraud schemes, put those responsible in jail and bring a measure of justice to the victims.”
“This type of fraud is sickening,” said Patrick. “However, after years of investigation and incredible hard work by multiple agents and attorneys, these con artists are finally headed to prison. Their cruel tactics preyed on some very vulnerable people, thereby stealing millions from them. These sentences should send a strong message that we will follow the trail no matter how difficult and seek justice for those victimized by these types of transnational schemes. We will simply not stand by and allow criminals to use the names of legitimate government agencies to enrich themselves by victimizing others.”
“Today’s sentences should serve as a strong deterrent to anyone considering taking part in similar scams, and I hope that they provide a sense of justice to the victims as well,” said Benner. “There is no safe haven from U.S. law enforcement. HSI will continue to utilize our unique investigative mandate, in conjunction with our local, state and Federal partners, to attack and dismantle the criminal enterprises who would seek to manipulate U.S. institutions and taxpayers.”
“The sentences imposed on these defendants validate our efforts to bring to justice scammers who defraud taxpayers by impersonating employees of the IRS,” said George. “I wish to thank the Department of Justice, the multiple federal agencies involved and most importantly, my own investigators who continue to devote countless hours to these cases. Taxpayers must remain wary of unsolicited telephone calls from individuals claiming to be IRS employees. If any taxpayer believes they or someone they know is a victim of an IRS impersonation scam, they should report it to TIGTA at www.tigta.gov or by calling 1-800-366-4484.”
“The sentences imposed this week provide a clear deterrent to those who would seek to enrich themselves by extorting the most vulnerable in our society,” said Green. “These scammers should know that their actions carry real consequences, both for their victims and for themselves, and that there are dedicated agents and prosecutors who will go above and beyond to find them, identify them and hold them accountable for their crimes.”
Miteshkumar Patel, 42, of Illinois, was sentenced to serve 240 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on the charge of money laundering conspiracy. According to the factual basis of his plea agreement, Patel served as the manager of a Chicago-based crew of “runners” that liquidated and laundered fraud proceeds generated by callers at India-based call centers. Those callers used call scripts and lead lists to target victims throughout the United States with telefraud schemes in which the callers impersonated U.S. government employees from the IRS and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). The callers duped victims into believing that they owed money to the U.S. government and would be arrested or deported if they did not pay immediately. After the victims transferred money to the callers, a network of U.S.-based runners moved expeditiously to liquidate and launder fraud proceeds through the use of anonymous stored value cards. In addition to recruiting, training and tasking runners in his crew, Patel also coordinated directly with the Indian side of the conspiracy about the operation of the scheme. Patel was held accountable for laundering between $9.5 and $25 million for the scheme.
Hardik Patel, 31, of Illinois, was sentenced to serve 188 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on the charge of wire fraud conspiracy. Hardik Patel consented to removal to India upon completion of his prison term. According to the factual basis of his plea agreement, Hardik Patel was a co-owner and manager of an India-based call center involved in the conspiracy. In addition to managing the day-to-day operations of a call center, Patel also processed payments and did bookkeeping for the various call centers involved in the fraud scheme. One of the India-based co-defendants with whom Patel communicated about the scheme was Sagar “Shaggy” Thakar, a payment processor that Indian authorities arrested in April 2017 in connection with call center fraud. After moving to the United States in 2015, Hardik Patel continued to promote the conspiracy by recruiting runners to liquidate fraud proceeds. He was held accountable for laundering between $3.5 and $9.5 million dollars for the scheme.
Sunny Joshi, aka Sharad Ishwarlal Joshi and Sunny Mahashanker Joshi, 47, of Sugar Land, Texas, was sentenced to serve 151 months in prison on the charge of money laundering conspiracy and 120 months in prison for naturalization fraud to run concurrently followed by three years of supervised release. According to the factual basis of his plea agreement, Joshi was a member of a Houston-based crew of runners that he co-managed with his brother, co-defendant Mike Joshi aka Rajesh Bhatt. Sunny Joshi communicated extensively with India-based co-defendants about the operations of the scheme and was held accountable for laundering between $3.5 and $9.5 million. Additionally, in connection with his sentence on the immigration charge, Judge Hittner entered an order revoking Joshi’s U.S. citizenship and requiring him to surrender his certificate of naturalization.
Twenty-two of the defendants sentenced before Judge Hittner were held jointly and severally liable for restitution of $8,970,396 payable to identified victims of their crimes. Additionally, the court entered individual preliminary orders of forfeiture against 21 defendants for assets that were seized in the case, and money judgments totaling more than $72,942,300.
Eighteen other defendants were also sentenced in Houston before Judge Hittner this week:
• Fahad Ali, 25, of Indiana, was sentenced to serve 108 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner also recommended deportation upon completion of his sentence.
• Montu Barot, 30, of Illinois, was sentenced to serve 63 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a stipulated judicial order to remove Barot to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
• Rajesh Bhatt, aka Mike Joshi, 53, of Sugar Land, Texas, was sentenced to serve 145 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a stipulated judicial order to remove Bhatt to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
• Ashvinbhai Chaudhari, 28, of Pearsall, Texas, was sentenced to serve 87 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy.
• Jagdish Chaudhari, 39, of Alabama, was sentenced to serve 108 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a stipulated judicial order to remove Chaudhari to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
• Rajesh Kumar, 39, of Arizona, was sentenced to serve 60 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy.
• Jerry Norris, 47, of California, was sentenced to serve 60 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy.
• Nilesh Pandya, 54, of Stafford, Texas, was sentenced to serve three years of probation on one count of conspiracy.
• Nilam Parikh, 46, of Alabama, was sentenced to serve 48 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy.
• Bharatkumar Patel, 43, of Illinois, was sentenced to serve 50 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a judicial order to remove Patel to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
• Bhavesh Patel, 47, of Alabama, was sentenced to serve 121 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy.
• Dilipkumar A. Patel, 53, of California, was sentenced to serve 108 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a stipulated judicial order to remove Patel to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
• Dilipkumar R. Patel, 30, of Florida, was sentenced to serve 52 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy.
• Harsh Patel, 28, of New Jersey, was sentenced to serve 82 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner also recommended deportation upon completion of his sentence.
• Nisarg Patel, 26, of New Jersey, was sentenced on one count of conspiracy. He received a prison term of 48 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release.
• Praful Patel, 50, of Florida, was sentenced to serve 60 months in prison followed by Three years of supervised release on one count of conspiracy.
• Rajubhai Patel, 32, of Illinois, was sentenced to serve 151 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy.
• Viraj Patel, 33, of California, was sentenced to serve 165 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release on one count of money laundering conspiracy. Judge Hittner entered a stipulated judicial order to remove Patel to India at the conclusion of his sentence.
In addition to these 21 defendants, three others were previously sentenced for their involvement in the same fraud and money laundering scheme:
• Asmitaben Patel, 34, of Illinois, was sentenced before Judge Hittner on March 23. She received 24 months in prison on the charge of conspiracy.
• Dipakkumar Patel, 38, of Illinois, was sentenced before Judge Eleanor L. Ross in the Northern District of Georgia, on Feb. 14. Patel, who pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy and passport fraud, was sentenced to serve a prison term of 51 months, to run concurrently. He was also ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $128,006.26.
• Raman Patel, 82, of Arizona, was sentenced before Judge John Tuchi in the District of Arizona on Jan. 29. In connection with his plea agreement, Raman Patel received a probationary sentence for his plea to conspiracy. He was also ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $76,314.38.
According to various admissions made in connection with the defendants’ guilty pleas, between 2012 and 2016, the defendants and their conspirators perpetrated a complex fraud and money laundering scheme in which individuals from call centers located in Ahmedabad, India, frequently impersonated officials from the IRS or USCIS in a ruse designed to defraud victims located throughout the United States. Using information obtained from data brokers and other sources, call center operators targeted U.S. victims who were threatened with arrest, imprisonment, fines or deportation if they did not pay alleged monies owed to the government. Victims who agreed to pay the scammers were instructed how to provide payment, including by purchasing stored value cards or wiring money. Once a victim provided payment, the call centers turned to a network of runners based in the United States to liquidate and launder the extorted funds as quickly as possible by purchasing reloadable cards or retrieving wire transfers. In a typical scenario, call centers directed runners to purchase these stored value reloadable cards and transmit the unique card number to India-based co-conspirators who registered the cards using the misappropriated personal identifying information (PII) of U.S. citizens. The India-based co-conspirators then loaded these cards with scam funds obtained from victims. The runners used the stored value cards to purchase money orders that they deposited into the bank account of another person. For their services, the runners would earn a specific fee or a percentage of the funds. Runners also received victims’ funds via wire transfers, which were retrieved under fake names and through the use of using false identification documents, direct bank deposits by victims and Apple iTunes or other gift cards that victims purchased.
The indictment in this case also charged 32 India-based conspirators and five India-based call centers with general conspiracy, wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy. These defendants have yet to be arraigned in this case. An indictment is merely an allegation and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
HSI, DHS-OIG, and TIGTA led the investigation of this case. Also providing significant support were: the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs; Ft. Bend County Sheriff’s Office; police departments in Hoffman Estates and Naperville, Illinois, Leonia, New Jersey; San Diego County District Attorney’s Office Family Protection/Elder Abuse Unit; U.S. Secret Service; U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General; IOC-2; INTERPOL Washington; USCIS; U.S. State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service; and U.S. Attorney’s Offices of the Northern District of Alabama, District of Arizona, Central District of California, Northern District of California, District of Colorado, Northern District of Florida, Middle District of Florida, Northern District of Georgia, Northern District of Illinois, Northern District of Indiana, Eastern District of Louisiana, District of Nevada and the District of New Jersey. The Federal Communications Commission’s Enforcement Bureau provided assistance in TIGTA’s investigation. Additionally, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), Legal and Victim Programs, provided significant support to the prosecution.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mark McIntyre and Craig Feazel of the Southern District of Texas, Senior Trial Attorney Michael Sheckels and Trial Attorney Mona Sahaf of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP) and Trial Attorney Amanda S. Wick of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section prosecuted the case. Kaitlin Gonzalez of HRSP was the paralegal for this case.
A Department of Justice website has been established to provide information about the case to already identified and potential victims, and the public. Anyone who believes they may be a victim of fraud or identity theft in relation to this investigation or other telefraud scam phone calls may contact the FTC via this website.
Anyone who wants additional information about telefraud scams generally, or preventing identity theft or fraudulent use of their identity information, may obtain helpful information on the IRS tax scams website, the FTC phone scam website and the FTC identity theft website.
HOUSTON – A 37-year-old Houston resident has been sentenced for production and possession of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.Robert Alexander Shouse pleaded guilty June 6 to two counts of sexual exploitation of a child, one count of attempted sexual exploitation of a child and one count of possession of child pornography.U.S. District Judge Keith P. Ellison has sentenced Shouse to a total of 360 months in federal prison. At the hearing, the court heard additional evidence regarding the seven victims including a minor victim who Shouse sexually abused, recorded and distributed the images and videos. The court heard that Shouse secretly recorded minors, preyed upon them online and obtained child pornography from two other minors without their knowledge.One of the victims, who was a minor at the time of the offense, was present at the hearing and addressed the court. The victim told the court that Shouse had filled a void for him and his grandmother after his parents were incarcerated. The victim stated that Shouse portrayed himself as a superhero, but was in fact, the villain. The court ordered Shouse to pay $153,500 in restitution to the victims and will serve 10years on supervised release following completion of his prison term. During that time, he will have to comply with numerous requirements designed to restrict his access to children and the internet. Shouse will also be ordered to register as a sex offender.“Robert Shouse is the embodiment of evil,” said U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani. “He used money and gifts to sexually abuse a nine-year-old child for six years. He used his computer skills to target hundreds of children, stealing their innocence and shattering their lives. In essence, there was nothing he wouldn’t do satisfy his sick fantasies. Today’s sentence helps ensure that Shouse’s fantasies won’t become another child’s nightmare for decades to come.”“Robert Shouse engaged in horrific sexual abuse of minors, created child sexual abuse material involving those minors, and facilitated the trafficking of thousands of sexually explicit images and videos of minors through a dark web site that he controlled,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The defendant’s sexual exploitation of vulnerable children is despicable. The Criminal Division is fully committed to using all available tools to investigate and prosecute sexual crimes against children.”“The deviant, criminal actions of monsters like Robert Shouse are unforgivable and leave permanent trauma for their child victims,” said Special Agent in Charge Douglas Williams of the FBI Houston field office. “When these images and videos are posted and exchanged online, the victimization continues inperpetuity. Children are re-victimized as long as documentation of their sexual abuse is on the internet, available for others to access forever. This case is an example of the FBI’s commitment, and that of our national and international partners, to go after those who abuse one of our most vulnerable populations- our children.”Law enforcement identified Shouse in 2018 as an administrator for a CSAM website on the dark web which allowed facilitation of the sexual exploitation of minors while keeping secret the identities of the perpetrators. In his role, Shouse maintained the website which allowed users to post links to images and videos of CSAM. These links allowed a user to navigate to other websites, such as file-hosting websites where images and/or videos are stored, to download images and videos of child sexual abuse and child erotica. Additionally, forum users could discuss the sexual abuse of children.Authorities seized and terminated the website’s operation in 2019.In January 2019, authorities executed a search warrant at Shouse’s residence and seized multiple electronic devices. Forensic examination of the devices revealed more than 117,000 images and over 1,100 videos depicting children engaged in sexually explicit conduct including anal and vaginal penetration, masturbation, sadistic/masochistic conduct and lewd exhibition of genitalia.Over 4,000 images depicted the sexual exploitation of babies and toddlers.Additionally, law enforcement found images and videos of seven minor victims whom Shouse knew. Through the investigation, authorities learned he sexually abused one minor victim for a period of six years beginning when the victim was nine years old. Shouse befriended the child and provided money and gifts to the victim’s family. Shouse created over 925 images of child sexual abuse and 33 videos of this minor.In some of these images, Shouse made the victim wear a dog collar.Law enforcement found that Shouse had also secretly recorded two other minors, one in the bathroom and other in bedroom, and solicited two others online, asking them to send naked pictures of themselves. He also managed to download naked pictures of a couple who had shared them privately between them.Shouse will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.FBI-Texas City conducted the investigation with the assistance of the Fort Bend County District Attorney’s Office, Montgomery County Precinct Three Constable’s Office and Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office. The Justice Department thanks the Dutch National Police and United Kingdom National Crime Agency for their valuable assistance.Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly Ann Leo and Trial Attorney James E. Burke IV from the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section prosecuted the case, which was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood (PSC), a nationwide initiative the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched in May 2006 to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. U.S. Attorneys' Offices and the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section leads PSC, which marshals federal, state and local resources to locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children and identifies and rescues victims. For more information about PSC, please visit DOJ’s PSC page. For more information about internet safety education, please visit the resources tab on that page.
HOUSTON – A group of violent criminals are now facing possible severe federal penalties for firearms charges, to include use of a weapon resulting in death, carjacking, robbery and other felonies, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Jennifer B. Lowery.
Authorities arrested three Houston men today - Charles Dawson, 42, Damon Randolph, 47, and Kiyon Marshal, 40, today. They are expected to make their initial appearances in federal court before U.S. Magistrate Judge Sam Sheldon at 2 p.m. Also charged is Curtis Sandel, 36, who is already in custody and expected to be transferred to federal authorities to also make his initial appearance. All now face up to life in federal prison, if convicted
These men are now among several others who are charged with committing violent crimes in the Houston area.
U.S. Attorney Lowery joined several other leaders from federal and local law enforcement agencies to discuss the pervasive problem and their ongoing commitment to ensuring violent criminals are held accountable. Whether in state or federal court, leaders stressed that they strive to keep the community safe. The problem stretches across the entire Houston area, not in just one neighborhood or area.
In the aforementioned case, the men are accused of committing a robbery. During the crime, they allegedly shot and killed the victim and stole money and drugs from a local warehouse. They are charged with robbery, conspiracy to distribute narcotics and discharging a firearm resulting in death. They all now face up to life in prison, if convicted.
Also highlighted today was a violent carjacking case recently indicted in federal court. Iveon Gillaspie, 21, allegedly committed a violent carjacking Oct. 16, 2019. He was originally charged in state court and later allegedly committed another violent crime. A federal grand jury returned a two-count indictment charging him with carjacking and brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. He also now faces up to life in federal prison.
Earnest Taylor, 27, is a convicted felon. As such, he is prohibited from possessing a firearm. However, on Aug. 24, he fired shots from such a weapon at IRS agents who were attempting to serve a summons for aggravated identity theft. He is charged with illegally possessing the firearm and assault of a federal officer. He faces up to 20 years in prison.
Two more Houston men - Frederick Crouts, 19, and Donvonte Wallace, 24 - are charged with robbing what should be safe places in June. They allegedly robbed a Subway and a Family Dollar, brandishing a firearm during the crimes. They face 20 years as well as an additional minimum of seven years for the firearms charges.
Other people are also charged with unlawfully possessing firearms, such as Sergio Cabrera, 28, and Jordan Allen, 29. They face up to 10 years in federal prison, upon conviction.
The FBI; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Houston Police Department; Harris County District Attorney’s Office; Harris County Sheriff’s Office; Houston Independent School District Police Department; Treasure Inspector General for Tax Administration; and U.S. Postal Inspection Service are all assisting in the various cases.
An indictment or complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.
McALLEN, Texas – A 37-year-old man has been sentenced for straw purchasing and possessing child pornography on his cellphone, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.Jose Angel Hinojosa Jr. pleaded guilty Jan. 19.Chief U.S. District Judge Randy Crane has now ordered Hinojosa to serve 120 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release. At the hearing, the court heard additional evidence that cases like theseare far from victimless, with many of the weapons being traced to Mexico. In handing down the sentence, the court emphasized the seriousness of these crimes, describing them as heinous and reaffirming that they have real victims and far-reaching consequences. From June 5, 2016, through May 9, 2022, Hinojosa engaged in firearms dealing by straw purchasing firearms from an online gun broker. He then arranged for the weapons to be exported into Mexico. Law enforcement was able to locate several weapons tied to Hinojosa. At the time of his plea, he admitted to attempting to smuggle more than 40 firearms. During the firearms investigation, authorities learned Hinojosa maybe linked to crimes involving child pornography. A search warrant was executed and authorities discovered several videos of minors engaging in sexual conduct on Hinojosa’s phone. Hinojosa admitted to receiving child pornography on his cellphone from various third parties.Hinojosa was permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender to U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility on Jan. 7, 2025.The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives conducted the investigation in conjunction with Homeland Security Investigations - Child Exploitation Task Force. Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric D. Flores prosecuted the case.
HOUSTON - A 28-year-old Indian citizen has entered a guilty plea in a years-long international conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
Between 2017 and 2020, Zaheen Malvi, who was illegally residing in Heber Springs, Arkansas, assisted Indian call centers in a telemarketing scheme that extorted millions of dollars from hundreds of victims in the United States. Malvi first acted as a runner in the scheme, going to different Target stores in the Chicago area and depleting funds from gift cards that victims had transferred to the call centers. In later years, Malvi managed other runners as they traveled around the country, picking up packages filled with cash that call center victims had mailed.
“The Indian call centers perpetrating these scams are relentless,” said Hamdani. “They prey on the fears and insecurities of the most vulnerable among us, such as the elderly. But we are relentless too. Today, one more criminal is finally held to account for the many years he helped funnel money from victims into the pockets of overseas scammers…and tomorrow, we keep working.”
One common script used in the scheme involved coercing victims into believing federal agents were investigating them. The “agent” on the phone would convince the victim the only way to clear his or her name from investigation was to buy gift cards and transfer the redemption codes to the call center or mail cash in a package to a name and address the call center provided. Runners in the United States would then deplete the gift card funds and pick up the packages.
As part of his plea agreement, Malvi will pay restitution to the scheme’s identified victims.
U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen accepted the plea and set sentencing for Aug. 14. At that time, Malvi faces up to 20 years in prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.
He will remain in custody pending that hearing.
The Social Security Administration – Office of Inspector General (SSA-OIG), Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, U.S. Postal Inspection Service and Homeland Security Investigations in Houston and Fayetteville, Arkansas, conducted the investigation with the assistance of the FBI and Heber Springs Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephanie Bauman and Kate Suh are prosecuting the case.
The SSA and its OIG consistently warns people of similar scams. Protect yourself!
HOUSTON – A Houston woman has been ordered to federal prison following her conviction of conspiracy to commit health care fraud, announced U.S. Attorney Jennifer B. Lowery.
Kyhati Undavia pleaded guilty Oct. 12, 2021.
Today, U.S. District Judge Hanen ordered Undavia to serve 27 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by three years of supervised release. In handing down the sentence, the court considered the $12 million dollar restitution she paid at the time of the sentencing. In handing down the sentence, Judge Hanen noted restitution goes a long way to show acceptance but you cannot buy your way out of prison.
At the time of her plea, Undavia admitted to submitting claims to federal health benefit programs such as TRICARE, Department of Labor Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (DOL-OWCP) and Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs (CHAMPVA) for compounded medication prescriptions. Undavia has a professional background as a pharmacist who controlled and operated Memorial Pharmacy.
From December 2012 to December of 2018, Undavia hired employees to market Memorial Pharmacy to physicians as a place to submit compounded drug prescriptions. Undavia paid kickbacks through the marketers to physicians in efforts to persuade them to write prescriptions and send them to Memorial on behalf of their patients.
Instead of providing pain medication prescriptions directly to the patients who could select a pharmacy of their choice, the bribed physicians sent the prescriptions directly to Memorial. In some instances, patients were never seen by an actual physician. Instead, physicians authorized prescriptions for beneficiaries that a marketer provided to them.
The marketer paid the physician an illegal kickback for the prescriptions or Undavia would directly pay them. Beneficiaries often received medicated creams that they did not need or want.
Undavia received approximately $22 million from Tricare, DOL-OWCP and CHAMPVA for the prescriptions.
“Today’s sentencing is a testament to the dedication and determination of the investigative and legal teams,” said Special Agent in Charge Scott Pierce, U.S. Postal Service - Office of Inspector General (USPS-OIG), Southern Area Field Office. “The Postal Service spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on health care related costs and these monies are critical to those who legitimately require medical services. As in this case, our criminal investigators will diligently pursue any individual or organization intent on defrauding the Postal Service with an eye on both federal prosecution and returning lost monies to the affected program.”
Undavia 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 Defense Criminal Investigative Services, DOL - Office of Inspector General (OIG), USOS-OIG, Veterans Affairs - OIG and FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tina Ansari prosecuted the case.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
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
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
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
SAN ANTONIO – A Mexican national man and his wife, both residing in San Antonio, were sentenced in federal court today for a scheme to defraud business investors of over $1 million and failing to properly declare their income to the Internal Revenue Service.
Juan Enrique Kramer, 46, was sentenced to three years in prison, forfeiture of $59,589 in proceeds, restitution of $1,171,497 payable to the victims of his wire fraud, and restitution of $727,936 to the IRS. Adriana Pastor, 47, was sentenced to 18 months in prison and is also liable for the $727,936 to the IRS. Both Kramer and Pastor were also sentenced to three years of post-release supervision.
According to court documents, Kramer and other co-conspirators promoted a “turn-key” business venture to Mexican nationals, consisting of a chain of Mexican food restaurants throughout the United States and Mexico known as “Las Quesadillas.” Kramer charged buyers a set fee ranging from $105,000 to $250,000 and promised to perform all tasks necessary for establishing a fully functional restaurant, including finding and renting a suitable location; obtaining all permits; providing assistance in obtaining visas for buyers; completing construction; training employees; and handling all legal fees and incorporation issues.
The defendants took funds from buyers but failed to provide the promised services. Instead, they used the funds for personal gain or to provide partial payments to previous customers who were demanding their money back. In addition to partial refunds, Kramer would also offer stakes in other businesses as an alternative to repayment. If buyers refused, Kramer would threaten to sue them for breach of contract. The defendants perpetrated their scheme on at least eight different victims resulting in a total loss of more than $1 million.
“Investment fraud schemes such as what Kramer and Pastor engaged in are specifically designed to take advantage of vulnerable, trusting individuals,” said U.S. Attorney Ashley C. Hoff. “Today’s sentences underscore that this is unacceptable criminal conduct and violators will be held accountable.”
Kramer and Pastor did not declare any of the investor income to the IRS. In 2016, Pastor signed a tax return which falsely stated a net income loss. In 2017 and 2018, the couple did not file any tax returns whatsoever, despite still running restaurants and taking in investor money.
On February 1, 2022, Kramer pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of failure to file an individual tax return. On February 22, 2022, Pastor pleaded guilty to one count of aiding or assisting in filing a false tax return. Two co-defendants who remain are pending sentencing.
“With Kramer and Pastor came a scheme that caused harm and created victims to citizens in two nations. Our efforts to coordinate with our law enforcement partners at home and abroad help ensure justice is served and criminals pay the price regardless of international borders,” said Special Agent in Charge Ramsey E. Covington, of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Houston Field Office. “These two are con artists who swindled people out of money.”
The IRS-CI and the FBI investigated the case with assistance from the Texas State Securities Board.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Justin Chung, Matthew W. Kinskey and Antonio Franco Jr. prosecuted the case.
SAN ANTONIO – Kenneth, Christopher, and Irma Flores, the three San Antonio family members who pleaded guilty to government fraud and gratuities charges in August 2023, were sentenced in federal court Friday.
According to court documents, Kenneth Flores, 51, Christopher Flores, 55, and Irma Flores, 75, conspired together to defraud the United States by eliminating competition and fixing contract awards and prices on Army contracts for the housekeeping and janitorial services at Army Hospitals and Medical Centers. Kenneth Flores pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government; Irma and Christopher Flores pleaded guilty to paying gratuities to government officials who helped in the scheme to defraud government contracts. The scheme involved a corrupt partnership between the three Flores family members and co-conspirator government employees. Karisa Waysepappy Kelley and John Jordan “Chip” Mathes. The scheme brought in millions of dollars in work on Army healthcare housekeeping and janitorial services contracts to the Flores family in return for bribes and kickbacks, which helped induce Kelley and Mathes to aid the Flores’ in eliminating competition in the process.
From Nov. 15, 2018, until June 25, 2020, Christopher Flores’s company, Alliance Supply, paid $216,710.46 to Mathes’ company, C & S Consulting. From Feb. 21, 2019, until July 17, 2020, Alliance Supply paid Kelley’s company Waysepappy Consulting $57,906.50. Irma Flores served as the bookkeeper for Allegiance Environmental Services, a company owned by Kenneth Flores, under which Alliance operated. Mathes and Kelley pleaded guilty in February 2023. Both are scheduled to sentenced in the coming weeks.
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Fred Biery sentenced Kenneth Flores to four years in prison, Christopher Flores to two years in prison, and Irma Flores to five years of probation. As part of their plea agreements, they agreed to pay restitution in the amount of $3.7 million.
“The actions of these three family members—defrauding our institutions and corrupting the integrity of government contracts intended to support military facilities—were a betrayal of the public trust,” said U.S. Attorney Jaime Esparza for the Western District of Texas. “Our office remains committed to rooting out corruption and holding accountable those who seek to exploit government resources for personal gain.”
“The Department of Defense (DoD) Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service, is committed to protecting the integrity of the DoD procurement process," said Acting Special Agent in Charge Ryan Settle for the DCIS Southwest Field Office, "Today's outcome represents the extraordinary efforts by our law enforcement partners, alongside the Department of Justice, to hold accountable those who seek to enrich themselves by fraudulent means and pilfer precious taxpayer resources.”
“Today’s sentencing illustrates Army CID’s commitment to protecting the integrity of the Army’s procurement process and ensuring that Department of the Army resources are safeguarded against unlawful and unfair practices,” said Special Agent in Charge Maria E. Thomas for the Department of the Army Criminal Investigation Division’s Central Texas Field Office. “We’ll continue to work diligently with our law enforcement partners to expose fraudulent activity and hold individuals accountable who attempt to defraud the U.S. Army and government for services Soldiers and families rely on.”
“Government contracts support the missions of the United States and its military,” said Special Agent in Charge Jamie Willemin for the U.S. General Services Administration Office of Inspector General’s Southwest and Rocky Mountain Investigations Division. “Those who do business with the federal government are expected to engage in fair and honest business practices. GSA OIG will work diligently with investigative partners to investigate fraudulent activity and hold offenders accountable for their actions.”
“It is fitting that the sentences for these felons are handed down in Military City USA. Whether you’re from San Antonio or anywhere else in our country, defrauding our nation’s armed forces is a level of greed that shouldn’t be explored,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Lucy Tan of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Houston Field Office. “Today’s sentences underscore our unwavering commitment to partner with other law enforcement agencies to bring to justice those who engage in bribery and corrupt practices, regardless of their position or influence.”
The DCIS, Army CID, GSA-OIG, and IRS-CI investigated the case.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kelly Stephenson, Joe Blackwell, former AUSA William Lewis, and Special Assistant United States Attorney Jay Porier prosecuted the case.
In Waco today, 27-year-old Christopher Almaguer and his wife, 27-year-old Sarah Rashelle Almaguer, of Killeen were each sentenced to 60 years in federal prison for sexually assaulting children and producing child pornography, announced U.S. Attorney John F. Bash, U.S. Secret Service Special Agent in Charge William Noonan, Dallas Field Office, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Killeen Police Chief Charles F. Kimble.
In addition to the prison terms, United States District Judge Alan D Albright ordered each defendant to pay $10,000 to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Fund and be placed on supervised release for the remainder of their lives after completing their respective prison terms.
On October 30, 2018, the defendants pleaded guilty to one count of sexual exploitation of children and one count of production of child pornography. By pleading guilty, the Almaguers admitted that in December 2017 they uploaded sexually explicit videos of themselves sexually assaulting children as young as eight months old. According to court records investigators compiled a list of approximately 25 potential minor child victims, ranging in age from infants to fourteen years of age, from the Central Texas area.
“To me this is the most significant case we’ve prosecuted since I became U.S. Attorney,” stated U.S. Attorney Bash. “The Almaguers were serial child abusers. They abused 25 children that we know about—children from the neighborhood, children from church, children they babysat. The youngest victim was an infant. And the nature of the abuse was unimaginable. They also made videos of the children’s torture and shared them. Theseare two of the most wicked criminals in Texas history.”
“The sentencing in this child exploitation case emphasizes the commitment of the Secret Service to remove predators from our communities,” said William Noonan, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Secret Service Dallas Field Office. “The Secret Service will continue to work closely with our network of law enforcement partners to bring those who commit crimes against children to justice.”
This morning, Judge Albright also sentenced Christopher Almaguer’s brother, 25-year-old Paul Perez, Jr. of Killeen, to 20 years in federal prison followed by a lifetime of supervised release. Judge Albright also ordered Perez to pay $10,000 to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Fund. On September 25, 2018, Perez pleaded guilty to two counts of receipt of child pornography. Perez admitted to receiving images and videos from the Almaguers which depicted the sexual abuse of children.
“My office does all it can to protect Texans, and I am proud of the difficult work that my Child Exploitation Unit and the U.S. Department of Justice undertakes in order to keep our children safe from dangerous predators,” Attorney General Paxton said. “The detestable people who perpetuate such horrific crimes against children must be held accountable for their actions.”
The Almaguers and Perez have remained in custody since their arrests by investigators with the Texas Office of Attorney General, Child Exploitation Unit, and special agents with the U.S. Secret Service in February and March 2018, respectively.
This case was investigated by the Texas Office of the Attorney General, Criminal Investigations Division, Child Exploitation Unit; the U.S. Secret Service; Killeen Police Department; and, the Temple Police Department. This investigation was initiated in February 2018 when Facebook.com provided a Cybertip to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) reporting a user was uploading suspected images and videos depicting child pornography. Without the indispensable assistance of Facebook and NCMEC, this case would not have been brought to the attention of law enforcement. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory S. Gloff prosecuted this case on behalf of the Government.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
United States Attorney John F. Bash, Secret Service Special Agent in Charge Paul Duran, and Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that 26-year-old Christopher Almaguer and his wife, 27-year-old Sarah Rashelle Almaguer, of Killeen pled guilty today in Waco, Texas, to one count of sexual exploitation of children and one count of production of child pornography. The Almaguers each face a mandatory minimum term of 15 years up to 30 years in federal prison on each count.
Appearing before United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske, the Almaguers admitted that in December 2017 they uploaded sexually explicit videos of themselves sexually assaulting children as young as eight months old. According to court records investigators compiled a list of approximately 25 potential minor child victims, ranging in age from infants to fourteen years of age, from the Central Texas area.
The Almaguers have remained in custody since their arrests by investigators with the Texas Office of Attorney General, Child Exploitation Unit, and special agents with the United States Secret Service in February 2018. Sentencing has been scheduled before United States District Judge Alan D. Albright for January 29, 2019.
This case was investigated by the Texas Office of the Attorney General, Criminal Investigations Division, Child Exploitation Unit, the United States Secret Service and the Killeen Police Department. Assistant United States Attorney Gregory S. Gloff is prosecuting this case on behalf of the Government.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
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
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
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
In Waco today, 27-year-old Christopher Almaguer and his wife, 27-year-old Sarah Rashelle Almaguer, of Killeen were each sentenced to 60 years in federal prison for sexually assaulting children and producing child pornography, announced U.S. Attorney John F. Bash, U.S. Secret Service Special Agent in Charge William Noonan, Dallas Field Office, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Killeen Police Chief Charles F. Kimble.
In addition to the prison terms, United States District Judge Alan D Albright ordered each defendant to pay $10,000 to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Fund and be placed on supervised release for the remainder of their lives after completing their respective prison terms.
On October 30, 2018, the defendants pleaded guilty to one count of sexual exploitation of children and one count of production of child pornography. By pleading guilty, the Almaguers admitted that in December 2017 they uploaded sexually explicit videos of themselves sexually assaulting children as young as eight months old. According to court records investigators compiled a list of approximately 25 potential minor child victims, ranging in age from infants to fourteen years of age, from the Central Texas area.
“To me this is the most significant case we’ve prosecuted since I became U.S. Attorney,” stated U.S. Attorney Bash. “The Almaguers were serial child abusers. They abused 25 children that we know about—children from the neighborhood, children from church, children they babysat. The youngest victim was an infant. And the nature of the abuse was unimaginable. They also made videos of the children’s torture and shared them. Theseare two of the most wicked criminals in Texas history.”
“The sentencing in this child exploitation case emphasizes the commitment of the Secret Service to remove predators from our communities,” said William Noonan, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Secret Service Dallas Field Office. “The Secret Service will continue to work closely with our network of law enforcement partners to bring those who commit crimes against children to justice.”
This morning, Judge Albright also sentenced Christopher Almaguer’s brother, 25-year-old Paul Perez, Jr. of Killeen, to 20 years in federal prison followed by a lifetime of supervised release. Judge Albright also ordered Perez to pay $10,000 to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Fund. On September 25, 2018, Perez pleaded guilty to two counts of receipt of child pornography. Perez admitted to receiving images and videos from the Almaguers which depicted the sexual abuse of children.
“My office does all it can to protect Texans, and I am proud of the difficult work that my Child Exploitation Unit and the U.S. Department of Justice undertakes in order to keep our children safe from dangerous predators,” Attorney General Paxton said. “The detestable people who perpetuate such horrific crimes against children must be held accountable for their actions.”
The Almaguers and Perez have remained in custody since their arrests by investigators with the Texas Office of Attorney General, Child Exploitation Unit, and special agents with the U.S. Secret Service in February and March 2018, respectively.
This case was investigated by the Texas Office of the Attorney General, Criminal Investigations Division, Child Exploitation Unit; the U.S. Secret Service; Killeen Police Department; and, the Temple Police Department. This investigation was initiated in February 2018 when Facebook.com provided a Cybertip to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) reporting a user was uploading suspected images and videos depicting child pornography. Without the indispensable assistance of Facebook and NCMEC, this case would not have been brought to the attention of law enforcement. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory S. Gloff prosecuted this case on behalf of the Government.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.
United States Attorney John F. Bash, Secret Service Special Agent in Charge Paul Duran, and Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that 26-year-old Christopher Almaguer and his wife, 27-year-old Sarah Rashelle Almaguer, of Killeen pled guilty today in Waco, Texas, to one count of sexual exploitation of children and one count of production of child pornography. The Almaguers each face a mandatory minimum term of 15 years up to 30 years in federal prison on each count.
Appearing before United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske, the Almaguers admitted that in December 2017 they uploaded sexually explicit videos of themselves sexually assaulting children as young as eight months old. According to court records investigators compiled a list of approximately 25 potential minor child victims, ranging in age from infants to fourteen years of age, from the Central Texas area.
The Almaguers have remained in custody since their arrests by investigators with the Texas Office of Attorney General, Child Exploitation Unit, and special agents with the United States Secret Service in February 2018. Sentencing has been scheduled before United States District Judge Alan D. Albright for January 29, 2019.
This case was investigated by the Texas Office of the Attorney General, Criminal Investigations Division, Child Exploitation Unit, the United States Secret Service and the Killeen Police Department. Assistant United States Attorney Gregory S. Gloff is prosecuting this case on behalf of the Government.
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
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
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
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
In San Antonio today, a federal judge sentenced 63–year-old Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Organization National President Jeffrey Faye Pike of Conroe, TX, to life, plus ten years, in federal prison for racketeering and drug trafficking charges.
That announcement was made today by United States Attorney John F. Bash, Western District of Texas; Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Special Agent in Charge Will Glaspy, Houston Division; Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent in Charge Christopher Combs, San Antonio Division; Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steven McCraw; Austin Police Chief Brian Manley; San Antonio Police Chief William McManus; and Atascosa County Sheriff David A. Soward
“As I have said before, this prosecution shows that the Department of Justice has the tools to strip away a veneer of legitimate activity to expose and punish underlying criminal conduct. Others—and not only those involved in violent activity—should take note,” stated United States Attorney John F. Bash.
On Monday, Judge Ezra sentenced Bandidos National Vice President John Xavier Portillo to two consecutive life sentences, plus twenty years, in federal prison.
On May 17, 2018, after a nearly three-month trial, jurors convicted Pike and Portillo of (count 1) conspiracy to violate the Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) statute; (count 3) murder in aid of racketeering; (count 4) conspiracy to commit murder in aid of racketeering; (count 5) one count of conspiracy to commit assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering; (counts 6 and 7) aiding and abetting assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering; (count 9) discharging a firearm during a violent crime; and, (count 12) interference with commerce by threats and violence. Jurors also convicted Portillo of (count 2) murder in aid of racketeering; (count 8) discharging a firearm during a crime of violence; (count 10) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine and cocaine; (count 11) possession with intent to distribute cocaine; and, (count 13) felon in possession of a firearm.
Jurors found Pike and Portillo guilty of conspiring to conduct the affairs of a criminal organization through racketeering acts including directing, sanctioning, approving and permitting members of the Bandidos to commit murder, attempted murder, robbery, assault, intimidation, extortion and drug trafficking. Evidence during trial revealed that in 2006, Pike and Portillo ordered other Bandidos members to murder Anthony Benesh. At the time, Benesh was attempting to start a Texas Chapter of the Hells Angels in Austin. Members of the Bandidos warned Benesh to cease his activities and recruitment, which Benesh ignored. Several Bandidos members then murdered Benesh on March 18, 2006 outside an Austin restaurant to protect the power, reputation and territory of the Bandidos enterprise.
Jurors also found that Portillo and others killed Robert Lara in January 2002 in Atascosa County as payback for killing Bandidos member Javier Negrete. Negrete, a member of the same local Bandidos chapter as Portillo at the time, was killed outside a San Antonio bar in October 2001.
Jurors also found that Pike, Portillo and others conspired to murder and assault members and associates of the Cossacks Outlaw Motorcycle Organization (Cossacks). Testimony revealed that Portillo, with Pike’s approval, declared that the Bandidos were “at war” with the Cossacks. A number of violent acts were committed by the Bandidos around Texas in furtherance of this “war,” including in Fort Worth, Gordon, Odessa, Port Aransas, Crystal City and elsewhere.
Testimony also revealed that Portillo and other members of the Bandidos were engaged in trafficking methamphetamine and cocaine and maintained an agreement with the Texas Mexican Mafia wherein Bandidos members were not required to pay the 10-percent “dime” to the Texas Mexican Mafia in exchange for permission to traffic narcotics.
“The sentencing of Bandidos National President Jeffery Pike highlights the success law enforcement agencies can achieve and the impact we can have when we combine our resources and investigative talents. DEA will continue to work with our law enforcement partners and pursue those criminal organizations who threaten our communities with violence and engage in the distribution of illegal and dangerous drugs,” stated Will Glaspy, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration – Houston Division.
“The sentencing rendered today is the result of the outstanding partnership between the FBI and all our law enforcement partners,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Christopher Combs. “This effort demonstrates our ongoing commitment to prevent gang violence and criminal activity from poisoning our communities. It also sends a clear message that we will relentlessly pursue and prosecute the leaders and members of these violent criminal enterprises.”
“Gang violence is a threat to the safety and security of Texas communities,” said DPS Director Steven McCraw. “Theseare complex cases, but thanks to the hard work and collaboration between law enforcement authorities and prosecutors, these criminals are no longer free to prey on our communities.”
The FBI, DEA and Texas DPS investigated this case together with the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Austin Police Department, New Braunfels Police Department, Seguin Police Department, San Antonio Police Department, Bexar County Sheriff’s Department, Atascosa County Sheriff’s Department, Palo Pinto County Sheriff’s Department, Ector County Sheriff’s Department, the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office, and U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas. Assistant United States Attorneys Eric Fuchs and John Gibson are prosecuting this case on behalf of the Government.
MACON, Ga. – Three Central Georgia residents with lengthy criminal histories were sentenced this week to federal crimes in three separate Project Safe Neighborhoods cases targeting convicted felons with guns.
Raikwon Christian, 27, of Macon, was sentenced to serve 120 months in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release on Oct. 31; Trayon Brown, 35, of Macon, was sentenced to serve 71 months in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release on Oct. 31; and Gabriel Brown, 43, of Warner Robins, Georgia, was sentenced to serve 70 months in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release on Oct. 30 by Chief U.S. District Judge Marc Treadwell. The defendants each previously pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The defendants are not eligible for parole.
“Convicted felons caught with firearms—especially assault weapons and large capacity magazines—pose a danger in our communities and will face federal prosecution for illegally possessing them,” said U.S. Attorney Peter D. Leary. “These Project Safe Neighborhoods cases are all the result of strong collaboration between many local, state and federal law enforcement partners working to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer.”
“ATF’s mission is to deny criminals access to firearms and protect the rights of law-abiding citizens. When offenders illegally possess firearms that can be used against our citizens, our children and our community, ATF takes this very seriously,” said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Assistant Special Agent in Charge Beau Kolodka.
According to court documents in the Christian case, Christian reported to the Georgia Department of Community Supervision (DCS) Office in Macon on Dec. 13, 2021, and was arrested on an active probation warrant. Before entering the building, Christian placed a bag behind a trashcan outside the building. The bag held a 9mm semi-automatic pistol, along with a cell phone and Christian’s identification. Agents also found recent posts of Christian on Facebook holding AR-15 and AK-47 style rifles with extended magazines. A search warrant was executed at 1367 Sanford Avenue in Macon on Dec. 14, where the photos were taken. Five firearms were located inside the residence, including a revolver with an obliterated serial number, a stolen and loaded semi-automatic pistol and a semi-automatic pistol equipped with a large capacity magazine. In addition, agents found illegal drugs—most already packaged for distribution—plus digital scales, cells phones and plastic baggies. A review of the property’s own security footage showed numerous suspected drug transactions. Agents later found the AK-47 rifle Christian held in social media posts hidden in a vent. The firearm was loaded and equipped with a magazine containing 27 rounds of ammunition.
According to court documents in the Trayon Brown case, a Bibb County Sheriff’s Office deputy attempted to stop a vehicle on Napier Avenue in Macon for a traffic violation on June 8, 2022. Brown was driving; instead of pulling over, Brown turned onto a side street and jumped out of the vehicle while it was still moving and it collided with a sign. Brown ran away with the deputy in pursuit; the officer was injured jumping a chain-linked fence chasing after the defendant. The deputy found Brown hiding in some bushes near a private residence with a semi-automatic pistol next to him. Brown’s car contained methamphetamine, marijuana, digital scales, several additional small bags and a bag of ammunition. Brown has two prior robbery by force convictions in Bibb County, Georgia, Superior Court.
According to court documents in the Gabriel Brown case, Brown and three people were inside his home on Beech Drive in Oglethorpe, Georgia, when several gunshots were fired into the home and one person was struck with shotgun pellets. Brown, who has three prior felonies, grabbed his Taurus handgun and fired four to five shots at a vehicle speeding away. Brown then went to grab another pistol. Emergency responders recognized Brown as a felon. Brown turned over three firearms inside his home: a loaded 9mm semi-automatic pistol with an extended magazine; a fully loaded and chambered 5.56 caliber semi-automatic pistol fitted with a laser; and one fully loaded and chambered .45 ACP caliber semi-automatic pistol. Agents with GBI’s Southwest Regional Drug Enforcement Office executed a search warrant and found a 9x19 caliber semi-automatic pistol and ammunition.
These cases are being prosecuted as part of the joint federal, state, and local Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) Program, the centerpiece of the Department of Justice’s violent crime reduction efforts. PSN is an evidence-based program proven to be effective at reducing violent crime. Through PSN, a broad spectrum of stakeholders work together to identify the most pressing violent crime problems in the community and develop comprehensive solutions to address them. As part of this strategy, PSN focuses enforcement efforts on the most violent offenders and partners with locally based prevention and reentry programs for lasting reductions in crime.
The Raikwon Christian and the Trayon Brown cases were both investigated by ATF and the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office (BCSO).
The Gabriel Brown case was investigated by ATF, the GBI Region 3 Field Office, the GBI’s Southwest Regional Drug Enforcement Office, the Macon County Sheriff’s Office and the Montezuma Police Department.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Deitrick prosecuted the cases for the government.
SAN ANTONIO – A San Antonio woman was sentenced today to 33 months in prison for embezzling from her employer.
According to court documents, Cindy Ellen McCarthy, aka Cindy Wojtaszek, 48, was the bookkeeper of a Castle Hills business. Between November 2012 and July 2018 McCarthy paid her personal credit card from the company’s bank account. To conceal her fraud, McCarthy altered the company’s monthly bank statements to make it appear that payments were being made to a vendor. Through approximately 200 transactions, McCarthy defrauded the company of over $850,000.
On October 21, 2021, McCarthy pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud. In addition to the prison sentence, McCarthy was ordered to pay $855,538.56 in restitution to her former employer.
“Small and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of America,” said U.S. Attorney Ashley C. Hoff. “Today’s sentencing reflects the seriousness of McCarthy’s abuse of her position and the resolve of this office to pursue those who betray their employers’ trust by embezzling money.”
“The defendant in this case took advantage of her role as a bookkeeper to betray and deceive her employer for personal gain,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Jason Hudson. “The FBI is committed to investigating financial fraud and ensuring those who commit these crimes are held accountable for their actions.”
The FBI, with invaluable assistance from the Castle Hills Police Department, investigated the case.
Assistant U.S. Attorney William R. Harris prosecuted the case.
In Austin today, a federal judge sentenced Akhabue Ehis Onoimoimilin, aka “David Harrison,” a 29-year-old Nigerian national residing in Houston, to 87 months of imprisonment for his participation in a money laundering conspiracy that swindled more than $2.2 million from victims using Business Email Compromise (BEC) and romance scams.
In addition to the prison term, U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman ordered that Onoimoimilin pay $865,210.78 in restitution to his victims and be placed on supervised release for two years after his prison term. Judge Pitman also ordered a money judgment against the defendant in the amount of $50,605 for the proceeds he received from the scheme.
In a BEC scheme, scammers target businesses and individuals making wire transfer payments, especially those with access to company finances. The scammers trick the employees into making wire transfer payments to bank accounts thought to belong to trusted partners - except the money ends up in accounts controlled by the fraudsters. Sometimes the scammers use computer intrusion techniques to alter legitimate payment request emails, changing the recipient bank accounts. Sometimes they send spoofed emails from email addresses similar to the real email accounts used by trusted partners.
In romance scams, conspirators often located outside the U.S. review established online dating sites, targeting victims who appear lonely based upon their profiles. The fraudsters create fake profiles and exploit the emotional vulnerabilities of the victims. Once an emotionally dependent relationship is established, the fraudsters create various crises and ruses, such as an emergency medical need that must be paid to allow the conspirator to travel to meet the victim in person and purportedly requiring the immediate transfer of funds. These schemes are often emotionally and fiscally harmful, as the duration of the “relationship” can span months and years. They often end only when the victim drains his or her resources and can no longer send funds to the conspirators.
On February 2, 2021, Onoimoimilin pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, admitting that beginning prior to June 2015, he used a fraudulent foreign passport in the name of David Harrison to open bank accounts in Austin and Houston. Onoimoimilin used these financial accounts to receive, launder and distribute wire transfers to coconspirators illegally receiving proceeds of BEC and romance schemes. For his efforts, Onoimoimilin collected between 10% and 15% of more than $420,000 in fraudulently obtained funds.
“These morally reprehensible schemes deprive people of their hard-earned money and even their entire life savings and retirement funds, leaving humiliation and financial ruin behind,” said U.S. Attorney Ashley C. Hoff. “Our office will continue to vigorously prosecute those who conspire to prey on vulnerable victims in this manner.”
“The types of fraud committed by Mr. Onoimoimilin not only have lasting ramifications for the affected victims, but also threaten the integrity of our country’s financial systems,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Tim Tubbs of the Homeland Security Investigation’s San Antonio Division. “While today’s sentence is a decisive victory for the victims, the overall fight against fraud continues. HSI will do everything in its power to bring other cyber criminals to justice and recover ill-gotten gains for those victimized.”
HSI conducted this investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Keith Henneke, Michael C. Galdo and Robert Almonte II prosecuted this case.
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
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
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
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
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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
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
PHOENIX, Ariz. – The Justice Department announced today 49 awards to states, territories, and the District of Columbia as part of the Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program. This investment of over $231 million will fund state crisis intervention court proceedings, including but not limited to, extreme risk protection order (ERPO) programs that work to keep guns out of the hands of those who pose a threat to themselves or others. The Department awarded $6,111,652 to the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, which carries out various coordinating, monitoring, and reporting functions regarding the administration and management of criminal justice programs in Arizona. This investment in community safety is authorized by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022, historic legislation to address and reduce gun violence.
“The Justice Department is working relentlessly to protect communities from violent crime and the gun violence that often drives it, and the Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program is an important part of that effort,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “These awards will support the kinds of crisis intervention programs that we know save lives and help protect children, families, and communities across the country from senseless acts of gun violence.”
“The Department of Justice’s strategy to reduce violent crime and gun violence includes prioritizing support for successful, evidence-based programs,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco. “The grants announced today invest in and highlight proven state and local violence prevention and intervention programs, that will make our communities safer.”
These awards, administered by the Department’s Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), provide funding to states for the creation and implementation of extreme risk protection order programs, state crisis intervention court proceedings, and related gun violence reduction initiatives. Extreme risk protection order programs empower family members, health care providers, school officials and law enforcement officers to petition a court to temporarily prevent a person from accessing firearms if they are found to be a danger to themselves or others. Funds can also support interventions like drug, mental health and veterans’ treatment courts, gun violence recovery courts, behavior health deflection and outpatient treatment centers.
“Protecting communities from gun crime is an urgent public safety challenge and a critical part of the Justice Department’s work to ensure that everyone in this country can live free from the fear of violence,” said Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta. “The resources we are announcing today will give communities the tools they need to prevent firearm violence and deliver support to those who are at risk of committing or being victimized by gun crime.”
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act also seeks to ensure that extreme risk protection order laws and programs are implemented in accordance with the Constitution and provide for adequate due process protections. Projects funded under this program will need to demonstrate that they have taken measures to safeguard the constitutional rights of an individual subject to a crisis intervention program or ERPO initiative. The Justice Department has long supported state efforts to increase the use of ERPOs and in 2021 the Department released model legislation to help states create their own extreme risk protection order systems and provide for intervention before warning signs turn into tragedy.
“We have too many firearms and not enough mental health services in America,” said United States Attorney Gary Restaino. “Our state and local social services agencies and law enforcement partners have lots of good ideas to intervene early and reduce gun violence. I look forward to seeing how the best practices developed through this grant can help to protect Arizona’s communities.”
Signed into law by President Biden in June 2022, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is the most significant piece of federal gun safety legislation in almost three decades and comes as a response to recent mass shootings and to the far more common, but no less tragic, incidents of community gun violence. Including the Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program, the law allocates a total of $1.4 billion to OJP over five years to develop, implement, and sustain meaningful investments in safer communities.
“These awards will help meet two monumental public safety challenges — the alarming proliferation of gun violence in our country and the clear need for front-end interventions to slow the cycle of violence and victimization in our most underserved communities,” said BJA Director Karhlton F. Moore. “The Bureau of Justice Assistance is proud to make these resources available to states as a critical part of its mission to reduce and prevent crime and to promote a fair and effective criminal justice system.”
For a full list of awards, please visit: https://data.ojp.usdoj.gov/stories/s/O-BJA-2023-171458/b5xz-as5z/. These awards are the latest effort from the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs to implement this historic legislation.
RELEASE NUMBER: 2023-020_ACJC-Grant-Recipient
# # #
For more information on the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/
Follow the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, on Twitter @USAO_AZ for the latest news.
PHOENIX, Ariz. – Today, the United States Attorney’s Office announced its immigration enforcement statistics for July 2022 to September 2022. These cases are prosecuted in partnership with the Tucson and Yuma Sectors of the Customs and Border Protection’s U.S. Border Patrol, along with Homeland Security Investigations and assistance from other federal, state, and county agencies. In the three-month period ending September 30, 2022, the United States brought criminal charges in Arizona against 2,011 individuals who illegally entered or re-entered the United States. In its ongoing effort to deter unlawful immigration, the United States also filed 307 cases against individuals responsible for smuggling undocumented noncitizens to and within the District of Arizona.
Reducing migrant smuggling and mitigating the risk to communities impacted by these offenses continues to be a priority for the Office and its law enforcement partners. Some of these prosecutions are directed against leaders and coordinators of non-U.S. citizen smuggling organizations. Other prosecutions are aimed at deterring young adult drivers, often recruited over social media platforms, from engaging in this dangerous activity. Prosecutions against young drivers include seven cases brought against juvenile smugglers during this time-period.
These statistics represent United States Attorney's Office prosecutions only. The numbers do not include individuals apprehended by immigration enforcement officials and subjected solely to administrative process.
RELEASE NUMBER: 2022-195_2022 Third Quarter Immigration Enforcement Statistics
# # #
For more information on the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/
Follow the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, on Twitter @USAO_AZ for the latest news.
INDIANAPOLIS- Clifton Withers, 49, of Indianapolis, has been sentenced to 188 months in federal prison, followed by five years of supervised release, after pleading guilty to two counts of possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
According to court documents, on January 7, 2020, Withers was sentenced and placed on home detention and monitoring by Marion County Community Corrections following a conviction for Dealing in a Narcotic Drug. While serving his community corrections sentence, Withers rented two storage units in Indianapolis.
On May 19, 2020, law enforcement officers conducted a court-authorized search of the storage units and located a clear plastic bag containing three large discs of fentanyl, approximately 250 grams, multiple digital scales, a plastic bottle of lactose—a known drug cutting agent, a large metal press, three handgun holsters, and a black bag containing several boxes of ammunition. Officers also found nine firearms. Withers is prohibited under federal law from ever legally possessing a firearm due to his status as a convicted felon.
Additionally, officers searched Withers’ vehicle and found three plastic bags an additional 55 grams of fentanyl that he intended to distribute, a metal press with heroin residue, two more digital scales, and a second metal press inside of a backpack. Officers also recovered a 9mm handgun Withers possessed in his home, as well as an illegal firearm silencer and three books on building military-grade firearms suppressors.
All told, Withers possessed nine guns, a firearm silencer, approximately over 300 grams of fentanyl that he intended to distribute. Withers has an extensive criminal record, including four felony drug trafficking convictions dating back to 1997, and one felony conviction for promoting animal fighting.
“This defendant is a lifelong drug dealer who has failed to rehabilitate despite given numerous chances to do so. After receiving a Community Corrections sentence armed drug trafficking, he immediately returned to trafficking large quantities of fentanyl and illegally possessing a silencer and an arsenal of firearms,” said Zachary A. Myers, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. “Fentanyl poisoning takes lives and devastates families in all zip codes and walks of life. Traffickers pose even more danger to our communities when they are heavily armed. Thanks to the outstanding work of our partners at the ATF and our federal prosecutors, the defendant’s career of armed drug trafficking has been halted for many years to come.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives investigated this case. The sentence was imposed by U.S. District Judge Matthew P. Brookman.
U.S. Attorney Myers thanked Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patrick Gibson and Corbin D. Houston, who prosecuted this case.
According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, as little as two milligrams of fentanyl can be fatal, depending on a person’s body size, tolerance, and past usage—a tiny amount that can fit on the tip of a pencil. Seven out of ten illegal fentanyl tablets seized from U.S. streets and analyzed by the DEA have been found to contain a potentially lethal dose of the drug.
One Pill Can Kill: Avoid pills bought on the street because One Pill Can Kill. Fentanyl has now become the leading cause of death for adults in the United States. Fentanyl is a highly potent opioid that drug dealers dilute with cutting agents to make counterfeit prescription pills that appear to be Oxycodone, Percocet, Xanax, and other drugs. Fake prescription pills laced with fentanyl are usually shaped and colored to look like pills sold at pharmacies. For example, fake prescription pills known as “M30s” imitate Oxycodone obtained from a pharmacy, but when sold on the street the pills routinely contain fentanyl. These pills are usually round tablets and often light blue in color, though they may be in different shapes and a rainbow of colors. They often have “M” and “30” imprinted on opposite sides of the pill. Do not take these or any other pills bought on the street – they are routinely fake and poisonous, and you won’t know until it’s too late.