Court's Instructions to the Jury as to Casey David Crowther — USA v. Crowther (Dkt. 126, M.D. Fla. No. 2:20-mj-01094, docketed in No. 2:20-cr-00114)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida · No. 2:20-cr-00114 · Doc. 126 · 2021-03-26 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
FORT MYERS DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
CASE NO. 2:20-cr-114-
FtM-66MRM 
-vs- 
 
CASEY DAVID CROWTHER 
 
 
COURT’S INSTRUCTIONS 
TO THE JURY 
 
Members of the Jury: 
It is my duty to instruct you on the rules of law 
that you must use in deciding this case. After I have 
completed these instructions, you will go to the jury room 
and begin your discussions – what we call your 
deliberations. 
You must decide whether the Government has proved the 
specific facts necessary to find the Defendant guilty 
beyond a reasonable doubt. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 1 of 26 PageID 732

- 2 - 
 
Your decision must be based only on the evidence 
presented during the trial. You must not be influenced in 
any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against the 
Defendant or the Government. 
You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you 
do not agree with the law – and you must follow all of my 
instructions as a whole. You must not single out or 
disregard any of the Court’s instructions on the law. 
The indictment or formal charge against a Defendant 
is not evidence of guilt. The law presumes every Defendant 
is innocent. The Defendant does not have to prove his 
innocence or produce any evidence at all. A defendant does 
not have to testify, and if the Defendant chose not to 
testify, you cannot consider that in any way while making 
your decision. The Government must prove guilt beyond a 
reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the 
Defendant not guilty. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 2 of 26 PageID 733

- 3 - 
 
The Government’s burden of proof is heavy, but it 
does not have to prove a defendant’s guilt beyond all 
possible doubt. The Government’s proof only has to exclude 
any “reasonable doubt” concerning the Defendant’s guilt. 
A “reasonable doubt” is a real doubt, based on your 
reason and common sense after you have carefully and 
impartially considered all the evidence in the case. 
“Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is proof so 
convincing that you would be willing to rely and act on 
it without hesitation in the most important of your own 
affairs. If you are convinced that the Defendant has been 
proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, say so. If you 
are not convinced, say so. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 3 of 26 PageID 734

- 4 - 
 
As I said before, you must consider only the evidence 
that I have admitted in the case. Evidence includes the 
testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted. But, 
anything the lawyers say is not evidence and is not binding 
on you. 
You should not assume from anything I have said that 
I have any opinion about any factual issue in this case. 
Except for my instructions to you on the law, you should 
disregard anything I may have said during the trial in 
arriving at your own decision about the facts. 
Your own recollection and interpretation of the 
evidence is what matters. 
In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and 
common sense to make deductions and reach conclusions. 
You should not be concerned about whether the evidence is 
direct or circumstantial. 
“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who 
asserts that he or she has actual knowledge of a fact, 
such as an eyewitness. 
“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of 
facts and circumstances that tend to prove or disprove a 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 4 of 26 PageID 735

- 5 - 
 
fact. There is no legal difference in the weight you may 
give to either direct or circumstantial evidence. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 5 of 26 PageID 736

- 6 - 
 
When I say you must consider all the evidence, I do 
not mean that you must accept all the evidence as true or 
accurate. You should decide whether you believe what each 
witness had to say, and how important that testimony was. 
In making that decision you may believe or disbelieve any 
witness, in whole or in part. The number of witnesses 
testifying concerning a particular point does not 
necessarily matter. 
To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest 
that you ask yourself a few questions: 
• Did the witness impress you as one who was telling 
the truth? 
 
• Did the witness have any particular reason not to 
tell the truth? 
 
• Did the witness have a personal interest in the 
outcome of the case? 
 
• Did the witness seem to have a good memory? 
 
• Did the witness have the opportunity and ability 
to accurately observe the things he or she 
testified about? 
 
• Did the witness appear to understand the questions 
clearly and answer them directly? 
 
• Did the witness’s testimony differ from other 
testimony or other evidence? 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 6 of 26 PageID 737

- 7 - 
 
You should also ask yourself whether there was 
evidence that a witness testified falsely about an 
important fact. And ask whether there was evidence that 
at some other time a witness said or did something, or 
did not say or do something, that was different from the 
testimony the witness gave during this trial. 
But keep in mind that a simple mistake does not mean 
a witness was not telling the truth as he or she remembers 
it. People naturally tend to forget some things or 
remember them inaccurately. So, if a witness misstated 
something, you must decide whether it was because of an 
innocent lapse in memory or an intentional deception. The 
significance of your decision may depend on whether the 
misstatement is about an important fact or about an 
unimportant detail. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 7 of 26 PageID 738

- 8 - 
 
You have been permitted to take notes during the 
trial. Most of you – perhaps all of you – have taken 
advantage of that opportunity. 
You must use your notes only as a memory aid during 
deliberations. You must not give your notes priority over 
your independent recollection of the evidence. And you 
must not allow yourself to be unduly influenced by the 
notes of other jurors. 
I emphasize that notes are not entitled to any greater 
weight than your memories or impressions about the 
testimony. 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 8 of 26 PageID 739

- 9 - 
 
Introduction to Offense Instructions 
 
The Second Superseding Indictment charges four 
separate crimes, called “counts,” against the Defendant. 
Each count has a number. You will be given a copy of the 
Second Superseding Indictment to refer to during your 
deliberations. I will refer to the Second Superseding 
Indictment as simply the indictment. 
I will now explain the law governing these offenses. 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 9 of 26 PageID 740

- 10 - 
 
Count One: Bank Fraud 
18 U.S.C. § 1344 
Count One alleges that Casey David Crowther committed the 
federal offense of Bank Fraud between April 2020 and February 
10, 2021.  Specifically, Count One alleges that Mr. Crowther 
entered into a scheme to defraud the Sanibel Captiva Community 
Bank and to obtain money from that bank by submitting a false 
loan application and revised loan application on behalf of his 
company Target Roofing and Sheet Metal, Inc. which knowingly 
contained false information in order to obtain a loan from the 
Sanibel Captiva Community Bank which was guaranteed by the 
United States Small Business Administration (SBA) pursuant to 
its Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).   
It is a Federal crime to carry out or attempt to carry 
out a scheme to defraud a financial institution or to 
obtain any moneys owned by or under the custody or control 
of a financial institution by means of false or fraudulent 
pretenses, representations or promises.  There are two 
alternative methods for establishing this offense: Proving 
a defendant carried out or attempted to carry out a scheme 
(1) to defraud a financial institution; or (2) to obtain 
money owned by or under the custody or control of a 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 10 of 26 PageID
741

- 11 - 
 
financial institution by means of false or fraudulent 
pretenses, representations, or promises.  
Where a statute specifies multiple alternative ways 
in which an offense may be committed, the indictment may 
allege the multiple ways in the conjunctive, that is, by 
using the word “and.”  If only one of the alternatives is 
proved beyond a reasonable doubt, that is sufficient for 
conviction, so long as you agree unanimously as to that 
alternative.  The Verdict Form given to you therefore will 
address both alternative methods of establishing Bank 
Fraud. 
As to the first alternative method, the Defendant can 
be found guilty only if all the following facts are proved 
beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) the Defendant knowingly carried out or attempted 
to carry out a scheme to defraud a financial 
institution;   
(2) the Defendant intended to defraud the financial 
institution; and 
(3) the financial institution was federally insured. 
  
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 11 of 26 PageID
742

- 12 - 
 
As to the second alternative method, the Defendant 
can be found guilty only if all the following facts are 
proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) the Defendant knowingly carried out or attempted 
to carry out a scheme to get money, assets, or 
other property from a financial institution by 
using 
false 
or 
fraudulent 
pretenses, 
representations, or promises about a material 
fact; 
(2) 
the 
false 
or 
fraudulent 
pretenses, 
representations, or promises were material; 
(3) the financial institution was federally insured. 
  
A “scheme to defraud” includes any plan or course of 
action intended to deceive or cheat someone out of money 
or property by using false or fraudulent pretenses, 
representations, or promises relating to a material fact. 
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly 
and with the specific intent to use false or fraudulent 
pretenses, representations, or promises to cause loss or 
injury.  Proving intent to deceive alone, without the 
intent to cause loss or injury, is not sufficient to prove 
intent to defraud. 
The Government does not have to prove all the details 
alleged in the indictment about the precise nature and 
purpose of the scheme. It also does not have to prove that 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 12 of 26 PageID
743

- 13 - 
 
the alleged scheme actually succeeded in defrauding 
anyone. What must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt is 
that the Defendant knowingly attempted or carried out a 
scheme substantially similar to the one alleged in the 
Second Superseding Indictment. 
As you know, the parties have stipulated that Sanibel 
Captiva 
Community 
Bank 
was 
an 
insured 
“financial 
institution” at all material times. 
A 
statement 
or 
representation 
is 
“false” 
or 
“fraudulent” if it is about a material fact that the 
speaker 
knows 
is 
untrue 
or 
makes 
with 
reckless 
indifference as to the truth and makes with intent to 
defraud. A statement or representation may be “false” or 
“fraudulent” when it is a half truth or effectively 
conceals a material fact and is made with the intent to 
defraud. 
A “material fact” is an important fact that a 
reasonable person would use to decide whether to do or 
not do something. A fact is “material” if it has the 
capacity or natural tendency to influence a person’s 
decision. It does not matter whether the decision-maker 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 13 of 26 PageID
744

- 14 - 
 
actually relied on the statement or knew or should have 
known that the statement was false. 
 
 
 
 
 
Count Two: False Statement to a Federally Insured 
Institution 
18 U.S.C. § 1014 
 
It is a Federal crime to knowingly make a false 
statement or report to a federally insured financial 
institution. 
Count Two alleges that Casey David Crowther committed the 
federal offense of Making a False Statement to the Sanibel 
Captiva 
Community 
Bank 
on 
or 
about 
April 
13, 
2020.  
Specifically, Count Two alleges that Mr. Crowther knowingly 
made false statements in the PPP revised loan application 
regarding the intended use of the loan proceeds in order to 
influence the actions of the Sanibel Captiva Community Bank.   
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only 
if all the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable 
doubt: 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 14 of 26 PageID
745

- 15 - 
 
(1) the Defendant made a false statement or report; 
 
(2) the Defendant did so knowingly and with intent 
to 
influence 
an 
action 
of 
the 
institution 
described 
in 
the 
indictment 
regarding 
an 
application or loan; and 
 
(3) the deposits of the institution were insured by 
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 
 
A statement or report is “false” if it is untrue when 
made and the person making it knows it is untrue. 
The heart of the crime is the attempt to influence 
the action of the institution by knowingly making a false 
statement or report. The Government does not have to prove 
that the institution was actually influenced or misled. 
As you know, the parties have stipulated that Sanibel 
Captiva 
Community 
Bank 
was 
an 
insured 
“financial 
institution” at all material times.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 15 of 26 PageID
746

- 16 - 
 
Counts Three and Four:  Illegal Monetary Transaction 
18 U.S.C. § 1957 
 
It is a Federal crime for anyone to engage in certain 
kinds of financial transactions commonly known as money 
laundering. 
Counts Three and Four allege that Casey David Crowther 
committed the federal offense of engaging in an Illegal 
Monetary 
Transaction, 
also 
known 
as 
money 
laundering.  
Specifically, on or about April 21, 2020 for Count Three and 
on or about April 24, 2020 for Count Four, it is alleged that 
Mr. Crowther engaged or attempted to engage in a specified 
monetary transaction in criminally derived property of a value 
greater than $10,000, the property having been derived from 
the Bank Fraud which is alleged in Count One.  In Count Three, 
the monetary transaction is described as a $100,000 wire 
transfer from Sanibel Captiva Community Bank in connection with 
the payment of a promissory note.  In Count Four, the monetary 
transaction is described as a $689,417.00 wire transfer from 
Sanibel Captiva Community Bank in connection with the purchase 
of a boat. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this offense 
only if all the following are proved beyond a reasonable 
doubt: 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 16 of 26 PageID
747

- 17 - 
 
(1) the Defendant knowingly engaged or attempted to 
engage in a monetary transaction; 
 
(2) the Defendant knew the transaction involved 
property or funds that were the proceeds of some 
criminal activity; 
 
(3) the property had a value of more than $10,000; 
 
(4) the property was in fact proceeds of bank fraud 
as alleged in the indictment; and 
 
(5) the transaction took place in the United States. 
 
The term “monetary transaction” means the transfer or 
exchange of funds by, through, or to a financial 
institution in a way that affects interstate commerce. 
As you know, the parties have stipulated that Sanibel 
Captiva Community Bank was a “financial institution” at 
all material times.  The parties have also stipulated that 
the transfers described in Counts Three and Four affected 
interstate commerce.  
The term “proceeds” means any property derived from 
or obtained or retained, directly or indirectly, through 
some form of unlawful activity, including the gross 
receipts of the activity. 
It does not matter whether the Defendant knew the 
precise nature of the crime or that the property came from 
committing bank fraud. But the Government must prove that 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 17 of 26 PageID
748

- 18 - 
 
the Defendant knew that the property involved in the 
monetary transaction was obtained or derived from 
committing some crime. 
Also it does not matter whether all the property 
involved was derived from a crime. The Government only 
has to prove that $10,000 worth of the property was 
obtained or derived from committing a crime. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 18 of 26 PageID
749

- 19 - 
 
It is possible to prove the Defendant guilty of a 
crime even without evidence that the Defendant personally 
performed every act charged. 
Ordinarily, any act a person can do may be done by 
directing another person, or “agent.” Or it may be done 
by acting with or under the direction of others. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 19 of 26 PageID
750

- 20 - 
 
“Good faith” is a complete defense to a charge that 
requires intent to defraud. A defendant is not required 
to prove good faith. The Government must prove intent to 
defraud beyond a reasonable doubt. 
An honestly held opinion or an honestly formed belief 
cannot be fraudulent intent – even if the opinion or belief 
is mistaken. Similarly, evidence of a mistake in judgment, 
an error in management, or carelessness cannot establish 
fraudulent intent. 
But an honest belief that a business venture would 
ultimately succeed does not constitute good faith if the 
Defendant 
intended 
to 
deceive 
others 
by 
making 
representations the Defendant knew to be false or 
fraudulent. 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 20 of 26 PageID
751

- 21 - 
 
During the trial you have heard the parties and 
witnesses talk about Interim Final Rules, which are 
regulations issued by the Small Business Administration 
to implement the Paycheck Protection Program as included 
in the CARES Act. 
An “Interim Final Rule” is a rule adopted by a federal 
agency that becomes effective without prior notice and 
public comment and that invites public comment after its 
effective date. 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 21 of 26 PageID
752

- 22 - 
 
You will see that the indictment charges that a crime 
was committed “on or about” a certain date. The Government 
does not have to prove that the offense occurred on an 
exact date. The Government only has to prove beyond a 
reasonable doubt that the crime was committed on a date 
reasonably close to the date alleged. 
The word “knowingly” means that an act was done 
voluntarily and intentionally and not because of a mistake 
or by accident. 
 
 
Each count of the indictment charges a separate 
crime. You must consider each crime and the evidence 
relating to it separately. If you find the Defendant 
guilty or not guilty of one crime, that must not affect 
your verdict for any other crime. 
I caution you that the Defendant is on trial only for 
the specific crimes charged in the indictment. You are 
here to determine from the evidence in this case whether 
the Defendant is guilty or not guilty of those specific 
crimes. 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 22 of 26 PageID
753

- 23 - 
 
You must never consider punishment in any way to 
decide whether the Defendant is guilty. If you find the 
Defendant guilty, the punishment is for the Judge alone 
to decide later. 
 
 
Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be 
unanimous – in other words, you must all agree. Your 
deliberations are secret, and you will never have to 
explain your verdict to anyone. 
Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but 
only after fully considering the evidence with the other 
jurors. So you must discuss the case with one another and 
try to reach an agreement. While you are discussing the 
case, do not hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and 
change your mind if you become convinced that you were 
wrong. But do not give up your honest beliefs just because 
others think differently or because you simply want to 
get the case over with. 
Remember that, in a very real way, you are judges – 
judges of the facts. Your only interest is to seek the 
truth from the evidence in the case. 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 23 of 26 PageID
754

- 24 - 
 
During your deliberations, you must not communicate 
with or provide any information to anyone by any means 
about this case. You may not use any electronic device or 
media to communicate to anyone any information about this 
case or to conduct any research about this case until I 
accept your verdict. In other words, you cannot talk to 
anyone 
on 
the 
phone, 
correspond 
with 
anyone, 
or 
electronically communicate with anyone about this case.  
You can only discuss the case in the jury room with your 
fellow jurors during deliberations. I expect you will 
inform me as soon as you become aware of another juror’s 
violation of these instructions. 
You may not use these electronic means to investigate 
or communicate about the case because it is important that 
you decide this case based solely on the evidence 
presented in this courtroom. Information on the internet 
or available through social media might be wrong, 
incomplete, or inaccurate. You are only permitted to 
discuss 
the 
case 
with 
your 
fellow 
jurors 
during 
deliberations because they have seen and heard the same 
evidence you have. In our judicial system, it is important 
that you are not influenced by anything or anyone outside 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 24 of 26 PageID
755

- 25 - 
 
of this courtroom. Otherwise, your decision may be based 
on information known only by you and not your fellow jurors 
or the parties in the case. This would unfairly and 
adversely impact the judicial process. 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 25 of 26 PageID
756

- 26 - 
 
When you get to the jury room, choose one of your 
members to act as foreperson. The foreperson will direct 
your deliberations and will speak for you in court. 
A 
verdict 
form 
has 
been 
prepared 
for 
your 
convenience. 
[Explain verdict] 
Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When 
you have all agreed on the verdict, your foreperson must 
fill in the form, sign it, date it, and return it to the 
courtroom. 
If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please 
write down your message or question and give it to the 
Court Security Officer. The Court Security Officer will 
bring it to me and I will respond as promptly as possible 
– either in writing or by talking to you in the courtroom. 
But I caution you not to tell me how many jurors have 
voted one way or the other at that time. 
Case 2:20-cr-00114-JES-M_M     Document 126     Filed 03/26/21     Page 26 of 26 PageID
757

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flmd.381779.126.0.pdf

Size

220,184 bytes

SHA-256

29e28b88f910185ce8cdd1e9b6d99e454527111ae0c05cb349b37c5938f4f4b7

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flmd.381779.126.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)