Court filing
Minute Entry for Virtual proceedings held before Judge John E. Steele:… — Casey David Crowther (Dkt. 69)
No. 2:20-cr-00114 · Doc. 69 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 69 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID 236
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
VS. CASE NO: 2:20-cr-114-JLB-MRM
CASEY DAVID CROWTHER
JUDGE: John E. Steele COUNSEL FOR TRENTON REICHLING
GOVERNMENT Michael Leeman
DEPUTY CLERK: Shelley Giauque COUNSEL FOR NICOLE HUGHES WAID
DEFENDANT: BRIAN DICKERSON
COURT Jeff Thomas PRETRIAL/PROBATION No Officer Present
REPORTER
DATE/TIME February 16, 2021 Interpreter n/a
01:30 PM
Status Conference via Zoom video conference
Start time: 1:30 PM
Court calls case. Counsel enter appearances.
This case will be tried by Judge Steele. A Second Superseding Indictment was filed on
2/10/2021. An arraignment was held 2/12/2021.
Mr. Reichling advises the court of the differences to the Second Superseding
Indictment. There were no changes as far as any additional counts being added. See
page 5 paragraph B that note the change between the Second Superseding Indictment
and the Superseding Indictment included two additional words “and in loan documents
submitted to the lender on or about April 14, 2020.” Then on page 6, in paragraph E,
the government included the last three lines of Paragraph E that were changed to
reflect, “did cause the lender”…the government made changes to reflect that the
misleading representations would and did cause the lender and SPC to approve the
PPP allocation to deposit $2,098,798 in PPP loans into an account under the
defendant’s control.
Ms. Waid would request that the Motion to Dismiss be reconsidered as to the Second
Superseding Indictment. Mr. Reichling does not see any arguments changing. There
have not been any substantive changes to the Second Superseding Indictment. Mr.
Reichling does not foresee any new arguments. Mr. Reichling would request that the
government’s prior response be considered. Court will consider and enter an order
following the hearing.
1. Counsel have conferred and both agree with a date certain for trial of Monday,
March 22, 2021.
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M Document 69 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID 237
2. The Court will reserve a block of time on the Friday, 3/19/2021 to take up any
housekeeping issues.
3. The Court will set a deadline of 3/15/2021 to file voir dire questions, exhibit list,
witness list a week.
4. Motions in Limine deadline will be on 3/8/2021.
5. Response time reduced to 7 days – counsel concur (this includes in limine
motions).
6. Forfeiture. Mr. Reichling notes that the money from the sale of the property in St.
James is held in escrow with the U.S. Marshal. The government does intend on
seek forfeiture of those funds.
7. Length of trial. Counsel will try to finish in 5 days. There are 146 exhibits, of
which the majority will be stipulated to. If the parties do not stipulate it is not so
much an authenticity issue, but an admissibility issue. The government will most
likely be calling 20 witnesses. Ms. Waid comments as to a plea offer that was
denied by the government today. Mr. Crowther was willing to plead to a 1014 for
mortgage fraud and he would then actually request a bench trial instead of
bringing in a jury. Ms. Waid does not plan to have any witnesses but could
potentially call three witnesses. Will stipulate to a lot of the evidence.
End time: 1:50 PM
-2-
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flmd.381779.69.0.pdf
- Size
- 76,830 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5f39efffb56a3878f172ffd60a77f2ec32b6af03169024be61f3711e8071de03
- Original
- PACER (login required)