Court filing
Text of Proposed Order — USA v. Vazquez (Dkt. 65.1)
Filed November 16, 2021 in USA v. Vazquez; one of 60 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-11-16 |
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 1:21-cr-20231-DMM · Doc. 65-1 · 2021-11-16 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 21-20231-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
CARLOS VAZQUEZ,
Defendant.
/
PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the United States of America (the
“United States”) for entry of a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (“Motion”) against Defendant
CARLOS VAZQUEZ (the “Defendant”). The Court has considered the Motion, is otherwise
advised in the premises, and finds as follows:
On April 15, 2021, a federal grand jury returned an Indictment charging the Defendant in
Counts 1 and 2 with wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Indictment, ECF No. 19. The
Indictment also contained forfeiture allegations, which alleged that, upon conviction of a violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, the Defendant shall forfeit to the United States any property constituting, or
derived from, proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A). See id. at 5 - 6.
On September 13, 2021, the Defendant pleaded guilty to Counts 1 and 2, more specifically
to wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. See Minute Entry, ECF No. 42; Transcript of
Change of Plea, ECF No. 54.
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 65-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2021 Page 1 of 5
2
The Report and Recommendation on Change of Plea recommended that the Defendant’s
guilty plea to Counts 1 and 2 of the Indictment be accepted, and a sentencing hearing was
scheduled for November 16, 2021. See Report and Recommendation on Change of Plea, ECF No.
44; Notice of Sentencing Hearing, ECF Nos. 46 and 55.
In support of the guilty plea, the Defendant executed a Factual Proffer, and the Court found
that there was a factual basis to support the Defendant’s conviction. See Factual Proffer,
ECF No. 43.
At all material times, the Defendant is and was CEO and 100% owner of Big League L.L.C.
(“Big League”). See Factual Proffer 1, ECF No. 43. On or about June 30, 2020, Defendant, with
the assistance of Individual #1, submitted an application for a Paycheck Protection Program
(“PPP”) loan in the amount of $921,875 on behalf of Big League to a Georgia-based internet loan
processor and PPP lender, Lender #1. Id. The note in the amount of $921,875 was executed on
the same day and contained the Defendant’s Docusign signature. Id. The Defendant and
Individual transmitted in interstate commerce this PPP application from Miami, Florida to
Georgia. See id. This PPP application contained materially false statements that Defendant and
Individual #1 knew to be untrue at the time they submitted the PPP application, specifically:
• The application certifies that the applicant, Big League, “was in operation on February
15, 2020 and had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll taxes or paid
independent contractors, as reported on Form(s) 1099-MISC;
• The application state that Big League’s Average Monthly Payroll was $368,750.00;
• The application state that Big League has 64 employees; and
• A purported IRS Form W-3 for the 2019 tax year was submitted in support of the
application which claims Big League paid wages in the amount of $4,425,000.
See id. at 1 – 2.
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 65-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2021 Page 2 of 5
3
As of February 15, 2020, Big League was not in operation and did not have employees or
payroll. See id. at 2. Big League has never registered to file taxes in Florida with the Florida
Department of Revenue. Id. Thus, the representations that Defendant and Individual #1 made to
Lender #1 were false, and Defendant and Individual #1 intended to defraud Lender #1. See id.
A few days after reinstating Big League, on June 29, 2020, Defendant opened a Chase
business account for Big League on which Defendant was the sole signatory. Id. Chase Bank’s
business records show that, on June 30, 2020, someone logged into Defendant’s Chase Business
account for Big League from the same IP address, 172.58.11.67, that was used to apply for the
PPP loan that day. Id. A week later, on July 6, 2020, $921,875 in PPP loan funds were deposited
into this Chase Bank account in Miami, Florida, from outside of Florida by Lender #1. Id.
Based on the record in this case, the total value of the proceeds traceable to the offense of
conviction is $921,875, which sum may be sought as a forfeiture money judgment pursuant to Rule
32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
In addition, also based on the record in this case, the following specific property is directly
subject to forfeiture, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A):
(i.)
a cashier’s check in the amount of $175,957.40, which represents proceeds obtained
as a result of the wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1343, to which the Defendant
pleaded guilty.
The Defendant turned over this cashier’s check in the amount of $175,975.40 to the United
States. See Presentence Investigation Report ¶15 (ECF No. 57). After the cashier’s check in the
amount of $175,975.40 is forfeited to the United States, this amount shall be credited toward the
Defendant’s forfeiture money judgment balance.
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 65-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2021 Page 3 of 5
4
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the evidence in the record, and for good cause shown,
the Motion is GRANTED, and it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A), 21 U.S.C. § 853, and Rule 32.2 of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure, a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of $921,875 is hereby
entered against the Defendant.
2.
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A), 21 U.S.C. § 853, the following specific
property is hereby forfeited and vested in the United States of America:
(i.)
A cashier’s check in the amount of $175,957.40 which the Defendant turned over
to the United States and represents proceeds obtained as a result of the wire fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1343, to which the Defendant pleaded guilty.
3.
Any duly authorized law enforcement agency may seize and take possession of the
forfeited property according to law.
4.
The United States shall send and publish notice of the forfeiture in accordance with
Rule 32.2(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(n).
5.
The United States is authorized to conduct any discovery that might be necessary
to identify, locate, or dispose of forfeited property, and to resolve any third-party petition, pursuant
to Rule 32.2(b)(3), (c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(m).
6.
Pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this Order
is final as to the Defendant.
7.
The Court shall retain jurisdiction in this matter for the purpose of enforcing this
Order, and pursuant to Rule 32.2(e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, shall amend
this Order, or enter other orders as necessary, to forfeit additional specific property when
identified.
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 65-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2021 Page 4 of 5
5
It is further ORDERED that upon adjudication of all third-party interests, if any, the Court
will enter a final order of forfeiture as to the property in which all interests will be addressed.
Upon notice from the United States that no claims have been filed within 60 days of the first day
of publication or within 30 days of receipt of notice, whichever is earlier, then, pursuant to Rule
32.2(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(7), this Order shall
become a Final Order of Forfeiture and any duly authorized law enforcement agency shall dispose
of the property in accordance with applicable law.
DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this _______ day of November 2021.
____________________________________
DONALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:21-cr-20231-DMM Document 65-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/16/2021 Page 5 of 5File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flsd.591071.65.1.pdf
- Size
- 197,706 bytes
- SHA-256
- e6c9334d93e012d7dfb9b1626298c1d4912f8d5830d954ab63cddbde28edc611
- Original
- PACER (login required)