Rule 5(c)(3) Documents Received as to Damisha Brown — United States v. Sutton et al. (Dkt. 122, S.D. W. Va.)

Summary

Document 122, filed March 5, 2025 in Case 2:24-cr-00192, holds the papers from Damisha Brown's Rule 5 arrest in the District of New Jersey, case 2:25-mj-10042-MAH, including that court's docket and the superseding indictment. At the 3/3/2025 initial appearance before Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer, Brown was released on a $10,000 unsecured appearance bond and directed to appear in the Southern District of West Virginia on 3/17/2025 before Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 1 of 43 PageID #: 517
CLOSED

USS. District Court

District of New Jersey [LIVE] (Newark)
CRIMINAL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:25-mj-10042-MAH All Defendants

Case title: USA v. BROWN

Internal Use Only

Date Filed: 03/03/2025

Other court case number: 2:24-CR-192 U.S.D.C. - SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA Date Terminated: 03/03/2025

Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer

Defendant (1)

DAMISHA BROWN
TERMINATED: 03/03/2025

Pending Counts
None

Highest Offense Level (Opening)
None

Terminated Counts

None

Highest Offense Level (Terminated)

None

Complaints

TITLE 18 USC § 1344 and 1349 - PAYCHECK PROTECTION
PROGRAM CONSPIRACY (Count | and 7)

represented by AREEB SALIM
FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
1002 BROAD STREET
NEWARK, NJ 07102
Email: areeb_salim@fd.org
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Designation: Public Defender or Community Defender Appointment

Disposition

Disposition

Plaintiff
USA
TERMINATED: 03/03/2025

represented by CAITLIN E. BARRETT
DOJ-USAO
970 BROAD STREET
NEWARK, NJ 07102
Email: caitlin.barrett@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Designation: Assistant US Attorney

Date Filed # Docket Text

03/03/2025 1 | Superseding Indictment Received as to DAMISHA BROWN (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 Arrest (Rule 5) of DAMISHA BROWN (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 2 | Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer: Initial Appearance in Rule 5 Proceedings as to DAMISHA

BROWN held on 3/3/2025. Defendant Released. Bail Set: $10,000 Unsecured Appearance Bond, PTS supervision, travel restricted, surrender
passport, etc. Defendant shall appear for an Initial Appearance in the Southern District of West Virginia on 3/17/2025 at 10:00 a.m. before
Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn. (ECR) (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 gi 3 | *SEALED* (Court only) CJA 23 Financial Affidavit by DAMISHA BROWN (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 4 | ORDER APPOINTING FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER as to DAMISHA BROWN AREEB SALIM for DAMISHA BROWN appointed...
Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer on 3/3/2025. (jqb, ) Modified on 3/4/2025 (jqb, ). (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 5 | ORDER advising of the United States' continuing obligation to produce all exculpatory evidence to the defendant pursuant to Brady v. Maryland.
Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer on 3/3/2025. (jqb, ) Modified on 3/4/2025 (jqb, ). (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 6 | ORDER Setting Conditions of Release as to DAMISHA BROWN (1) Defendant Released. Bail Set: $10,000 Unsecured Appearance Bond, PTS

supervision, travel restricted, surrender passport, no contact condition, etc. Defendant shall appear for an Initial Appearance in the Southern
District of West Virginia on 3/17/2025 at 10:00 a.m. before Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn (Finance notified). Signed by Magistrate Judge
Michael A. Hammer on 3/3/2025. (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 2 of 43 PageID #: 518
03/03/2025 7 | Unsecured Appearance Bond Entered as to DAMISHA BROWN in amount of $10,000. (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 NOTICE as to DAMISHA BROWN - Please be advised that an initial appearance was held in the above-captioned case pursuant to Rule 5 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. You can obtain the original record by accessing CM/ECF through PACER. (SDWV 2:24-cr-192) (jqb, )
(Entered: 03/04/2025)

03/03/2025 gi

(Court only) ***Case Terminated as to DAMISHA BROWN, ***Terminated defendant DAMISHA BROWN and USA, pending deadlines, and
motions. (jqb, ) (Entered: 03/04/2025)
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 3 of 43 PageID #: 519
Case 2:28-mii ODED YI ecEs RR ACE F TOTO RREY CROAMEP LT RARIEID: Sao

for the

District of New Jersey

MAGISTRATE'S COURTROOM MINUTES

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff

Vv.

DAMISHA BROWN
Defendant

PROCEEDINGS; Initial Appearance - R5 SDWV

L_] CoMPLAINT

ADVISED OF RIGHTS ADVISED OF CHARGES AND PENALTIES
L_] WAIVER OF COUNSEL

APPT. OF COUNSEL: [ ¥_] AFPD [| CJA

[] WAIVER OF HRG: [| PRELIM [___| REMOVAL

[__] CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE'S JURISDICTION

[| PLEAENTERED: [|] GUILTY_[_] NOT GUILTY

[__] PLEA AGREEMENT

[__] RULE 11 FORM

FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED _ FINANCIAL COLLOQUY
vw | BRADY ORDER

v¥ | WAIVED IDENTIY HEARING

LIONS

HEARING SET FOR:

[__] PRELIMINARY/REMOVAL HRG.
[__] DETENTION/BAIL HRG.

[] TRIAL: | |COURT[__]JURY
[] SENTENCING
OTHER: _ mritial before

in the SOW

Judge Omar J.

APPEARANCES:

AUSA: Caitlin Barrett

DEFT. COUNSEL: Areeb Salim
Liz Charleston

PO/PTS:

INTERPRETER

Language:

TIME COMMENCED: _ 2:2!
TIME TERMINATED: 3:32
CD NO: ECR

MAGISTRATE JUDGE: _Hon. Michael A. Hammer

CASE NO. 25-10052
DATE OF PROCEEDINGS: 3/3/2025
DATE OF ARREST: __ 3/3/2025

[| DETAINED W/O PREJUDICE TO MAKE A BAIL APPLICATION LATER
[__] CONSENT TO DETENTION WITH RIGHT TO MAKE A
BAIL APPLICATION AT A LATER TIME
[__] BAIL DENIED - DEFENDANT REMANDED TO CUSTODY
BAIL SET:_ $10,000
UNSECURED BOND
[__] SURETY BOND SECURED BY CASH/PROPERTY
TRAVEL RESTRICTED
REPORT TO PRETRIAL SERVICES
[__] DRUG TESTING AND/OR TREATMENT
MENTAL HEALTH TESTING AND/OR TREATMENT
SURRENDER AND/OR OBTAIN NO PASSPORT
SEE ORDER SETTING CONDITIONS OF RELEASE FOR
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS

DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE: 3/17/2025 at 10:00 a.m.

J. Baker

DEPUTY CLERK
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 4 of 43 PageID #: 520
Case 2:24-01}00092-MAldcurhaeunzent 4Fjlediles/OS/28/25PageagetLay PatpgelP: 880

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE District of New Jersey [LIVE]

Newark, NJ
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff,
V. Case No.: 2:25—mj—10042-MAH
Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer
DAMISHA BROWN

Defendant.

ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER

The financial inability of the defendant to retain counsel and having been established
by the Court, and the defendant not having waived the appointment of counsel,
IT IS on this 4th day of March, 2025,
ORDERED that Areeb Salim from the office of the Federal Public Defender for the

District of New Jersey is hereby appointed to represent said defendant in the cause until
further order of the Court.

s/ Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer

United States Magistrate Judge
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 5 of 43 PageID #: 521
for the District of New Jersey

United States of America
ORDER SETTING

Vv. CONDITIONS OF RELEASE
DAMISHA BROWN Case Number: 25-10042
Defendant

IT IS ORDERED on this _3rd_ day of __ March , 2025 that the release of the defendant is subject to the following conditions:

(1) The defendant must not violate any federal, state or local law while on release.

(2) The defendant must cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample if the collection is authorized by
42. US.C. § 14135a.

(3) The defendant must immediately advise the court, defense counsel, and the U.S. attorney in writing before
any change of address and/or telephone number.

(4) The defendant must appear in court as required and must surrender to serve any sentence imposed,

Release on Bond

Bail be fixed at $ 10,000 and the defendant shall be released upon:
Executing an unsecured appearance bond with co-signor(s) :
[| Executing a secured appearance bond] _} with co-signor(s) ,and( ) depositing
in cash in the registry of the Court Y% of the bail fixed; and/or] —_fexecute an agreement to forfeit designated property
located at . Local Criminal Rule 46.1(d)(3) waived/not waived by the

Court.
[__] Executing an appearance bond with approved sureties, or the deposit of cash in the full amount of the bail in lieu thereof;
Additional Conditions of Release

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B), the court may imapeme the following least restrictive condition(s) only as necessary to reasonably assure the appearance of the
person as required and the safety of any other person and the community, It is further ordered that the release of the defendant is subject to the condilion(s) listed below:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in addition to the above, the following conditions are imposed:

{Y¥} Report to Pretrial Services (“PTS”) as directed and advise them immediately of any contact with law enforcement personnel,
including but not limited to, any arrest, questioning or traffic stop,

{—_} The defendant shall not attempt to influence, intimidate, or injure any juror or judicial officer; not tamper with any witness,
victim, or informant; not retaliate against any witness, victim or informant in this case.

{__] The defendant shall be released into the third party custody of

who agrees (a) to supervise the defendant in accordance with all the conditions of release, (b) to use every effort to assure
the appearance of the defendant at all scheduled court proceedings, and (c) to notify the court immediately in the event the
defendant violates any conditions of release or disappears.

Custodian Signature: Date:

Eee
DNJ-CR-019((REV. 1/09)(modified AO-199) _ Page 1
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 6 of 43 PageID #: 522
The defendant’s travel is restricted to WA New Jersey Other

unless approved by Pretrial Services (PTS).
Surrender all passports and travel documents to PTS. Do not apply for new travel documents.
Substance abuse testing and/or treatment as directed by PTS, Treatment may include inpatient treatment.

| Surrender/Do not possess a fireann, destructive device, or other dangerous weapons, All firearms in any home in which the defendant resides shall be removed

[Vv]

v
v

within 24 hows and verification provided to PTS. The defendant shall also surrender all firearm purchaser's identification cards and permits to PTS
Mental health testing/treatment as directed by PTS.
Abstain from the use of alcohol.
Maintain current residence or a residence approved by PTS.
Maintain or obtain employment pre-approved by PTS,
No contact with minors unless in the presence of a patent or guardian who is aware of the present offense,
Have no contact with the following individuals: _¢o-defendants and/or co-conspirators, unless in the presence of counsel
Defendant is to participate in one of the following home confinement program components and abide by all the
requirements of the program which [ [will or ( ) will not include electronic monitoring or other location
verification system.
(i) Curfew. You are restricted to your residence every day {_}) from to , or
as directed by the pretrial services office or supervising officer; or
(ii) Home Detention. You are restricted to your residence at all times except for the following:
education; religious services; medical, substance abuse, or mental health treatment; attorney
visits; court appearances; court-ordered obligations; or other activities pre-approved by the
pretrial services office or supervising officer, Additionally, employment] | is permitted [is
not permitted,
(iii) Home Incarceration. You are restricted to your residence under 24 hour lock-down except
for medical necessities and court appearances, or other activities specifically approved by the
court,
[| (iv) Stand Alone Monitoring. You have no residential curfew, home detention, or home
incarceration restrictions. However, you must comply with the location or travel restrictions as
imposed by the court. Note: Stand Alone Monitoring should be used in conjunction with global
positioning system (GPS) technology.
[| Pay all or part of the cost of location monitoring based upon your ability to pay as determined by the
pretrial services or supervising officer,

Defendant is subject to the following computer/internet and network restrictions which may include manual

inspection, and/or the installation of computer monitoring software, as deemed appropriate by Pretrial

Services. The defendant consents to Pretrial Services’ use of electronic detection devices to evaluate the

defendant’s access to wi-fi connections.

(i) No Computers - defendant is prohibited from possession and/or use of computers or
connected devices,

(ii) Computer - No Internet Access: defendant is permitted use of computers or connected devices,
but is not permitted access to the Internet (World Wide Web, FTP Sites, IRC Servers, Instant Messaging,
etc);

[| (iii) Computer With Internet Access; defendant is permitted use of computers or connected devices, and
is permitted access to the Internet (World Wide Web, FTP Sites, IRC Servers, Instant Messaging, etc.)
for legitimate and necessary purposes pre-approved by Pretrial Services at [ ] home [ ] for employment
purposes.

(iv) Consent of Other Residents -by consent of other residents in the home, any computers in the home
utilized by other residents shall be approved by Pretrial Services, password protected by a third party
custodian approved by Pretrial Services, and subject to inspection for compliance by Pretrial Services.
Home computer networks are subject to inspection for compliance by Pretrial Services.

lV Other: Report to the Southern District of West Virginia on 3/17/2025 at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Omar J.

Aboulhosn at the Robert C. Byrd Courthouse, 300 Virginia Street, Charleston, WV 25301.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 7 of 43 PageID #: 523
ADVICE OF PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS

TO THE DEFENDANT:

YOU ARE ADVISED OF THE FOLLOWING PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS:

Violating any of the foregoing conditions of release may result in the immediate issuance of a warrant for your arrest, a
revocation of your release, an order of detention, a forfeiture of any bond, and a prosecution for contempt of court and could result in imprisonment,
a fine, or both.

While on release, if you commit a federal felony offense the punishment is an additional prison term of not more than ten years and
for a federal misdemeanor offense the punishment is an additional prison term of not more than one year, This sentence will be consecutive (i.e.,
in addition to) to any other sentence you receive.
It is a crime punishable by up to ten years in prison, and a $250,000 fine, or both, to: obstruct a criminal investigation; tamper with
a witness, victim, or informant; retaliate or attempt to retaliate against a witness, victim, or informant; or intimidate or attempt to intimidate a
witness, victim, juror, informant, or officer of the court. The penalties for tampering, retaliation, or intimidation are significantly more serious if
they involve a killing or attempted killing.
If, after release, you knowingly fail to appear as the conditions of release require, or to surrender to serve a sentence, you may be
prosecuted for failing to appear or surrender and additional punishment may be imposed. Ifyou are convicted of:
(1) an offense punishable by death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a term of fifteen years or more — you will be fined
not more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both;
(2) an offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of five years or more, but less than fifteen years — you will be fined not
more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both;
(3) any other felony — you will be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both;
(4) amisdemeanor— you will be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
A term of imprisonment imposed for failure to appear or surrender will be consecutive to any other sentence you receive. In
addition, a failure to appear or surrender may result in the forfeiture of any bond posted.

Acknowledgment of the Defendant

lacknowledge that I am the defendant in this case and that I am aware of the conditions of release, I promise to obey all conditions
of release, to appear as directed, and surrender to serve any sentence imposed. I am aware of the penalties and sanctions set forth above.

Pn ee

Defendant’s Signature

Wowie) Mea Jers ay

City and State

Directions to the United States Marshal

The defendant is ORDERED released after processing,
The United States marshal is ORDERED to keep the defendant in custody until notified by the clerk or judge that the defendant has
posted bond ign complied with all other conditions for release. If still in custody, the defendant must be produced before the

appropriate ju the time and place specified. iho
Date: Js, lo us”

Judicial Officer's Signature
Hon, Michael A. Hammer, USMJ
Printed Name and Title

SS
a SSS SSS SS ES
INJ-CR-OL9{(REV, 1/09)(modified AO-199) Page 3
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 8 of 43 PageID #: 524
AO 98 (Rev. 12/11) Appearance Bond

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the
District of New Jersey
United States of America )
v. )
) Case No, 25-10042

DAMISHA BROWN )
Defendant )

APPEARANCE BOND

Defendant’s Agreement

L, DAMISHA BROWN (defendant), agree to follow every order of this court, or any

court that considers this case, and I further agree that this bond may be forfeited if fail:
( X ) __ to appear for court proceedings;
( X ) _ ifconvicted, to surrender to serve a sentence that the court may impose; or
( \2 to comply with all conditions set forth in the Order Setting Conditions of Release.

Type of Bond
( ) () This is a personal recognizance bond.
( X ) (2) This is an unsecured bond of $ 10,000
( ) ©) This is a secured bond of $ , secured by:
( +) (a) $ , in cash deposited with the court.

( ) (b) the agreement of the defendant and each surety to forfeit the following cash or other property
(describe the cash or other property, including claims on it— such as a lien, mortgage, or loan —and attach proof of
ownership and value):

If this bond is secured by real property, documents to protect the secured interest may be filed of record,

( ) (¢) a bail bond with a solvent surety (attach a copy of the bail bond, or describe it and identify the surety):

Forfeiture or Release of the Bond

Forfeiture of the Bond. This appearance bond may be forfeited if the defendant does not comply with the above
agreement, The court may immediately order the amount of the bond surrendered to the United States, including the
security for the bond, if the defendant does not comply with the agreement. At the request of the United States, the court
may order a judgment of forfeiture against the defendant and each surety for the entire amount of the bond, including
interest and costs.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 9 of 43 PageID #: 525
AO 98 (Rey, 12/11) Appearance Bond

Release of the Bond. The court may order this appearance bond ended at any time. This bond will be satisfied and the
security will be released when either: (1) the defendant is found not guilty on all charges, or (2) the defendant reports to
serve a sentence.

Declarations

Ownership of the Property. 1, the defendant — and each surety — declare under penalty of perjury that:

(1) all owners of the property securing this appearance bond are included on the bond;

(2) the property is not subject to claims, except as described above; and

(3) I will not sell the property, allow further claims to be made against it, or do anything to reduce its value
while this appearance bond is in effect.

Acceptance. I, the defendant — and each surety — have read this appearance bond and have either read all the conditions
of release set by the court or had them explained to me. I agree to this Appearance Bond.

I, the defendant — and each surety — declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. (See 28 U.S.C. § 1746.)

Date: 3/3) (ES an

Defendant's signature

Surepy/property owner — printed name Surety/property owner — signature and date
Surety/property owner — printed name Surety/property owner — signature and date
Surety/property owner — printed name Surehy/property owner — signature and date
CLERK OF COURT
Date: 3/3/2025 s/J. Baker

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Approved, ;
Date: 3 [ 2 / es “ Yor

v
Judge’s signature
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 10 of 43 PageID #: 526
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE FiLeD

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON GRAND JURY 2024
JANUARY 22, 2025 SESSION JAN 22 2025

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Vv. CRIMINAL NO. 2:24-cr-00192
18 U.S.C. § 1349
18 U.S.C. § 1344 & 2

KISHA SUTTON
SHAMIESE WRIGHT
CYLENA SUTTON
RAHMEL MEEKINS
WILLIAM POWELL
DAMISHA BROWN
JASMINE SPENCER

SUPERS EDING

Se ee

ee

The Grand Jury Charges:

At all times material to this Superseding Indictment:

Introduction

Lis Beginning no later than in or about April 2021, and
continuing until at least in or about July 2021, at or near
Charleston, Kanawha County, West Virginia, within the Southern
District of West Virginia and elsewhere, defendants KISHA SUTTON,

SHAMIESE WRIGHT, CYLENA SUTTON, RAHMEL MEEKINS, WILLIAM POWELL,
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 11 of 43 PageID #: 527
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 12 of 43 PageID #: 528
100042 - VARacuTeRENaee Nt Feil RAW RA ASS / aga ot F208 FEhegs B+P 3

DAMISHA BROWN, and JASMINE SPENCER, and Lydia Spencer, named but
not indicted, conspired with each other and persons both known and
unknown to the Grand Jury, to commit bank fraud, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 1344 by applying for and obtaining fraudulent Paycheck
Protection Program (“PPP”) loans from financial institutions. The
scheme caused at least $140,625 in fraudulent PPP loans to be
issued to ineligible borrowers and for the funds to be used on
ineligible expenses.

Zs Defendant KISHA SUTTON caused the preparation and
submission of fraudulent PPP loan applications and IRS Forms 1040
Schedule C (“Schedule C”) on behalf of her co-conspirators in
exchange for up to 25 percent of the total funded amount. The
Schedules C qualified the borrowers for a loan amount they were
not eligible to receive by either reporting income for nonexistent
businesses or inflating the income of existing businesses.

The Paycheck Protection Program

3.3 On March 27, 2020, the President signed into law the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“The CARES
Act”), an economic stimulus bill that, among other things, provided
emergency assistance to small business owners, including
agricultural businesses, and nonprofit organizations in all U.S.

states, Washington D.C., and territories affected by the COVID-19
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 13 of 43 PageID #: 529
Came 22S er PUNO? - Mth t ur aeLIBae Nt lec IA PADS / 2ageeaups FOB FGaHe ge HBAS 9

pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the
authorization of up to $349 billion in forgivable loans to small
businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through
a program referred to as the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”).
Additional PPP funding was authorized in legislation enacted on or
about December 27, 2020, and March 11, 2021.

4. As discussed more fully below, the PPP, which was
operated by the Small Business Administration (“SBA”), provided
small businesses with funding to meet specific business
obligations, including payroll and rent. The PPP permitted
participating third-party lenders to approve and disburse
SBA-backed PPP loans to cover payroll, fixed debts, utilities,
rent/mortgage payments, accounts payable, and other bills incurred
by qualifying businesses during, and resulting from, the COVID-19
pandemic. PPP loans were fully guaranteed by the SBA. In the event
of default, the SBA would fully satisfy the lender for any balance
remaining on the loan. Further, the SBA would forgive any loan up
to 100 percent if the borrower utilized 60 percent of the loan on
payroll costs in the 24-week period post-disbursement, with the
remaining 40 percent going toward covered expenses including:
mortgage interest payments, rent payments, utilities, operations

expenditures, property damage costs, supplier costs, and worker
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 14 of 43 PageID #: 530
O22 - VED ur eT ee Nt FH ltetSAR AAD / aa ea GE ASOB SGahe fs BAB 0

protection expenditures. Whatever portion was not forgiven was
serviced as a loan.

5. The SBA promulgated regulations concerning eligibility
for a PPP loan. Individuals who operated a business under a “sole
proprietorship” business structure were eligible for a PPP loan.
To qualify for a PPP loan, individuals had to report and document
their income and expenses from the sole proprietorship, as
typically reported to the Internal Revenue Service on a Schedule
C for a given tax year. As with other PPP loans, this information
and supporting documentation was used to calculate the amount of
money the individual was entitled to receive under the PPP. The
maximum loan amount for a sole proprietor with no employees was
$20,833.

6. A PPP loan application was processed by the third-party
participating lender with whom the application was filed. If a PPP
loan application was approved, the participating lender would fund
the PPP loan. To encourage PPP loans to be issued, the loan was
guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the application, including
information from the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and
the listed number of employees, was transmitted by the lender to

the SBA while processing the loan.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 15 of 43 PageID #: 531
le The proceeds of a PPP loan were not permitted to be used

by the borrowers to purchase consumer goods, automobiles, personal
residences, clothing, jewelry, to pay the borrower’s personal
federal income taxes, and to fund the borrower’s ordinary
day-to-day living expenses unrelated to the specified authorized
expenses.

The Co-Conspirators and the Financial Institutions

8. Defendant KISHA SUTTON was a resident of Jersey City,
Hudson County, New Jersey. Defendant KISHA SUTTON caused the
creation and submission of fraudulent PPP applications for her
co-conspirators, and she received kickbacks from her
co-conspirators for her assistance.

9. Defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT was a resident of Charleston,
Kanawha County, West Virginia. Defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT recruited
at least one other co-conspirator, Lydia Spencer, not named as a
defendant herein, to join the conspiracy. Defendant SHAMIESE
WRIGHT authorized defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent
PPP loan on her behalf. As a result, defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT
received fraudulent PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the
proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for

the loan.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 16 of 43 PageID #: 532
Came 223 cnj C0? - MBean nae nt PbS / 2Aageesist CRABAGMIS YE BS 5B 2

10. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON was a resident of Charleston,
Kanawha County, West Virginia. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON authorized
defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for two fraudulent PPP loans on
her behalf. As a result, defendant CYLENA SUTTON received
fraudulent PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the proceeds to
defendant KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for the loans.

11. Defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS was a resident of South
Charleston, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Defendant RAHMEL
MEEKINS authorized defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent
PPP loan on his behalf. As a result, defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS
received fraudulent PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the
proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for
the loan.

12. Defendant WILLIAM POWELL was a resident of Huntington,
Cabell County, West Virginia. Defendant WILLIAM POWELL authorized
defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent PPP loan on his
behalf. As a result, defendant WILLIAM POWELL received fraudulent
PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the proceeds to defendant
KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for the loan.

13. Defendant DAMISHA BROWN was a resident of Charleston,
Kanawha County, West Virginia. Defendant DAMISHA BROWN authorized

defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent PPP loan on her
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 17 of 43 PageID #: 533
behalf. As a result, defendant DAMISHA BROWN received fraudulent

PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the proceeds to defendant
KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for the loan.

14. Defendant JASMINE SPENCER was a resident of Charleston,
Kanawha County, West Virginia. Defendant JASMINE SPENCER
authorized defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent PPP
loan on her behalf. As a result, defendant JASMINE SPENCER received
fraudulent PPP loan proceeds and paid a portion of the proceeds to
defendant KISHA SUTTON as a kickback for applying for the loan.

15. Lydia Spencer, named but not indicted, was a resident of
Charleston, Kanawha County, West Virginia. Lydia Spencer
authorized defendant KISHA SUTTON to apply for a fraudulent PPP
loan on her behalf, received fraudulent PPP loan proceeds, and
paid a portion of the proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON as a
kickback.

16. Financial Institution 1 was a non-bank financial
institution as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 20 headquartered in Laguna
Hills, California. Financial Institution 1 participated in the
SBA’s PPP as a lender, and as such, was authorized to lend funds
to eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.

17. Financial Institution 2 was a non-bank financial

institution as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 20 headquartered in Lake
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 18 of 43 PageID #: 534
Mary, Florida. Financial Institution 2 participated in the SBA’s

PPP as a lender, and as such, was authorized to lend funds to
eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.

18. Financial Institution 3 was a non-bank financial
institution as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 20 headquartered in Coral
Gables, Florida. Financial Institution 3 participated in the SBA’s
PPP as a lender, and as such, was authorized to lend funds to

eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 19 of 43 PageID #: 535
COUNT ONE

The Conspiracy

19. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 18 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

20. Beginning no later than in or about April 2021, and
continuing until at least in or about July 2021, at or near
Charleston, Kanawha County, West Virginia, within the Southern
District of West Virginia, and elsewhere, defendants KISHA SUTTON,
SHAMIESE WRIGHT, CYLENA SUTTON, RAHMEL MEEKINS, WILLIAM POWELL,
DAMISHA BROWN, and JASMINE SPENCER, and Lydia Spencer, named but
not indicted, knowingly and intentionally conspired with each
other and with other persons both known and unknown to the Grand
Jury, to commit bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344, that
is, to knowingly execute a scheme and artifice to defraud Financial
Institutions 1, 2, and 3, and to obtain moneys, funds, credits,
assets, securities, and other property owned by, and under the
custody and control of Financial Institutions 1, 2, and 3 by means
of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises
made in PPP loan applications and Schedules C.

21. In furtherance of the conspiracy, the defendants

committed the following acts:
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 20 of 43 PageID #: 536
Case22Arcj-001422-MADbcuMent Gent FHHidMonUWas 2 PaghégomlLsareygert BSas

Manner and Means

22. Defendant KISHA SUTTON caused the creation and
submission of PPP loan applications on behalf of defendants
SHAMIESE WRIGHT, CYLENA SUTTON, RAHMEL MEEKINS, WILLIAM POWELL,
DAMISHA BROWN, and JASMINE SPENCER, and Lydia Spencer, named but
not indicted, (hereinafter “the co-conspirators”) and with the
authorization of each of the co-conspirators in exchange for
payment from the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds.

23. In the applications, defendant KISHA SUTTON falsely
stated either the existence of a sole proprietorship prior to the
pandemic that generated $75,000 in gross income or greatly inflated
the revenues of any “businesses” that did exist in 2020.

24. Defendant KISHA SUTTON also caused the creation of
fictitious Schedules C to support each of the fraudulent PPP loan
applications that would be submitted to Financial Institutions 1,
2, and 3 on behalf of the co-conspirators. These Schedule Cs
falsely stated that defendant KISHA SUTTON’s co-conspirators had
operated sole proprietorships in 2020 that had $75,000 in gross
receipts or sales.

25. Financial Institutions 1, 2, and 3 received the

applications and Schedules C and funded the PPP loans.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 21 of 43 PageID #: 537
Case22Art-00122-MAPbcuMect REA FiddOOMRERy 2P age dgnLRareyeay assy

26. Once the PPP loans were funded, the co-conspirators paid
defendant KISHA SUTTON up to 25 percent of the total funded amount
of the PPP loans for her assistance. The co-conspirators kept the
remainder of the funds and spent the money on ineligible expenses.

27. On or about the dates listed below, defendant KISHA

SUTTON caused the submission of the following false PPP loan

applications on

behalf of her

co-conspirators,

which were

ultimately funded by Financial Institutions 1, 2, and 3:

DATE (on ox |CO-CONSPIRATOR / | FINANCIAL FUNDED AMOUNT

about) BORROWER INSTITUTION
a. 4/19/2021 |SHAMIESE WRIGHT 3 $15,625
b. |4/11/2021 |CYLENA SUTTON 1 $15,625
c. 4/14/2021 |CYLENA SUTTON 1 $15,625
d. 4/11/2021 |RAHMEL MEEKINS i $15,625
e. |4/22/2021 |WILLIAM POWELL 3 $15,625
f. 4/25/2021 |DAMISHA BROWN 1 $15,625
g. 5/27/2021 JASMINE SPENCER 1 $15,625
h. 4/8/2021 Lydia Spencer 1 $15,625
i. 4/8/2021 Lydia Spencer 2 $15,625

28. On or about the dates listed below,

paid defendant KISHA SUTTON for her services.

the co-conspirators

DATES (on or about) CO-CONSPIRATOR TOTAL AMOUNT
a. 5/7/2021 - 5/21/2021 SHAMIESE WRIGHT $3,000
b. 4/20/2021 - 5/4/2021 CYLENA SUTTON $2,500
Cc. 4/23/2021 -— 4/30/2021 RAHMEL MEEKINS $1,650
d. 7/6/2021 - 7/20/2021 WILLIAM POWELL $2,000
e. 4/30/2021 - 5/27/2021 DAMISHA BROWN $3,500
f. 6/30/2021 — 7/9/2021 JASMINE SPENCER $3,000
g. 5/3/2021 - 6/21/2021 Lydia Spencer $4,000
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 22 of 43 PageID #: 538
In violation of Title 18,

and 1349.

United States Code,

Sections 1344
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 23 of 43 PageID #: 539
Case222B4roj}-D0142 MAbbcuMent Gent Fi

Ci

Chetry (at saree

COUNT TWO

29. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

30. Between no later than on or about April 19, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about May 21, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and SHAMIESE WRIGHT, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

31. On or about April 19, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to
Financial Institution 3 on behalf of defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT and
with defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT’s authorization.

32. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
SHAMIESE WRIGHT was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

33. In fact, defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT did not have a
business in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant
SHAMIESE WRIGHT’s 2020 tax return listed $21,716 in wages and no

business income or expenses. Defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT applied for
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 24 of 43 PageID #: 540
Gase227F4rej-D0142 MABbeuMertGBnt FinedaheRIes2P agBadant sa kiyeans Bay

unemployment compensation throughout 2020 and stated, several
times, that she was not self-employed.

34. Financial Institution 3 funded defendant SHAMIESE
WRIGHT’s PPP loan for $15,625 on or about May 7, 2021.

35. Between on or about May 7, 2021, and on or about May 21,
2021, Defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT, within the Southern DISEFLCE. Of
West Virginia, remitted $3,000 of the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds
to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT spent the
remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal, ineligible
expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 25 of 43 PageID #: 541
COUNT THREE

36. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

37. Between no later than on or about April 11, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about May 2, 2021, defendants KISHA
SUTTON and CYLENA SUTTON, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

38. On or about April 11, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and an IRS Form Schedule
C to Financial Institution 1 on behalf of defendant CYLENA SUTTON
and with defendant CYLENA SUTTON’s authorization.

39. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
CYLENA SUTTON was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

40. In fact, defendant CYLENA SUTTON did not have a business
in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant CYLENA
SUTTON’s 2020 tax return listed $6,791 in wages and no business

income or expenses. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON applied for

Lo
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 26 of 43 PageID #: 542
unemployment compensation throughout 2020 and stated, several

times, that: she was not self-employed.

41. Financial Institution 1 funded defendant CYLENA SUTTON’s
PPP loan for $15,625 on or about April 20, 2021.

42. Between on or about April 20, 2021, and on or about April
27, 2021, defendant CYLENA SUTTON, within the Southern District of
West Virginia, remitted $2,000 of the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds
to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON spent the
remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal, ineligible
expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 27 of 43 PageID #: 543
CGase22Aro-00142-MAPbcumeot gent Fad

COUNT FOUR

43. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 and
36 through 42 are hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

44, Between no later than on or about April 14, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about May 4, 2021, defendants KISHA
SUTTON and CYLENA SUTTON, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

45. On or about April 14, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a second PPP loan application and a second
Schedule C to Financial Institution 1 on behalf of defendant CYLENA
SUTTON and with defendant CYLENA SUTTON’s authorization.

46. The second application mirrored the first. It and the
Schedule C stated that defendant CYLENA SUTTON was a sole
proprietor of a business that was established on January 1, 2017.
The application stated that in 2020, the business had a gross
income of $75,000. As part of the application, a 2020 Schedule C
was submitted listing gross receipts of $75,000 and a net profit
of $48,750.

47. As previously stated, in fact, defendant CYLENA SUTTON
did not have a business in 2020 with those gross receipts and

profit. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON’s 2020 tax return listed $6,791 in
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 28 of 43 PageID #: 544
CGase222PArc-DDIAZ MAbbcuhent G2nt Finiéoapaws

wages and no business income or expenses. Defendant CYLENA SUTTON
applied for unemployment compensation throughout 2020 and stated,
several times, that she was not self-employed.

48. Financial Institution 1 funded defendant CYLENA SUTTON’s
second PPP loan for $15,625 on or about May 2, 2021.

49. On or about May 4, 2021, defendant CYLENA SUTTON, within
the Southern District of West Virginia, remitted $500 of the
fraudulent PPP loan proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant
CYLENA SUTTON spent the remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on
personal, ineligible expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.

2PRGQERSiS aya BEM
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 29 of 43 PageID #: 545
CGase22re-DOI42- MAR cumecnma2t Fad

COUNT FIVE

50. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

51. Between no later than on or about April 11, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about April 30, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and RAHMEL MEEKINS, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

52. On or about April 11, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to
Financial Institution 1 on behalf of defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS and
with defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS’s authorization.

53. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
RAHMEL MEEKINS was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

54. In fact, defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS did not have a business
in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant RAHMEL
MEEKINS’s 2020 tax return listed $8,754 in wages and no business

income or expenses. Defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS applied for
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 30 of 43 PageID #: 546
unemployment compensation throughout 2020 and stated, several
times, that he was not self-employed.

55. Financial Institution 1 funded defendant RAHMEL
MEEKINS’s PPP loan for $15,625 on or about April 23, 2021.

56. Between on or about April 23, 2021, and on or about April
30, 2021, defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS, within the Southern District
of West Virginia, remitted $1, 650 of the fraudulent PPP loan
proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant RAHMEL MEEKINS spent
the remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal, ineligible
expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.

0142-MADocumentGent FHdddlecbias 2 Pagheomss aRRyGeuH!B675
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 31 of 43 PageID #: 547
Care22re-O0142 MADD CUMeRHESAL FROME 2 P RGB ARDIBS PEROUY RGB

COUNT SIX

57. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

58. Between no later than on or about April 19, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about July 20, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and WILLIAM POWELL, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

59. On or about April 19, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and an IRS Form Schedule
C to Financial Institution 3 on behalf of defendant WILLIAM POWELL
and with defendant WILLIAM POWELL’s authorization.

60. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
WILLIAM POWELL was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

61. In fact, defendant WILLIAM POWELL did not have a business
in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant WILLIAM
POWELL applied for unemployment compensation throughout 2020 and

stated, several times, that he was not self-employed.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 32 of 43 PageID #: 548
00142-MADoCUMent Seat Fide OM DANES 2 DRGBAGRIB SPRAYS AVE HBEAGB

62. Financial Institution 3 funded defendant WILLIAM
POWELL’s PPP loan for $15,625 on or about June 29, 2021.

63. Between on or about July 6, 2021, and on or about July
20, 2021, defendant WILLIAM POWELL, within the Southern District
of West Virginia, remitted $2,000 of the fraudulent PPP loan
proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant WILLIAM POWELL spent
the remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal, ineligible
expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 33 of 43 PageID #: 549
(Gase22Arof-00142 MARDcuMent G22At FrdehORMARD 2b RGBAGDLS S PIRASVSHBGAD

COUNT SEVEN

64. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

65. Between no later than on or about April 25, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about May 27, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and DAMISHA BROWN, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

66. On or about April 25, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to
Financial Institution 1 on behalf of defendant DAMISHA BROWN and
with defendant DAMISHA BROWN’s authorization.

67. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
DAMISHA BROWN was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

68. In fact, defendant DAMISHA BROWN did not have a business
in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant DAMISHA
BROWN’s 2020 tax return listed $668 in wages and no business income

or expenses. Defendant DAMISHA BROWN applied for unemployment
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 34 of 43 PageID #: 550
CGase22224nc-D42. Vi ADbcuhhent ®2At Fireed

cE

compensation throughout 2020 and stated, several times, that she
was not self-employed.

69. Financial Institution 1 funded defendant DAMISHA BROWN’s
PPP loan for $15,625 on or about April 30, 2021.

70. Between on or about April 30, 2021, and on or about May
27, 2021, defendant DAMISHA BROWN, within the Southern District of
West Virginia, remitted $3,500 of the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds
to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant DAMISHA BROWN spent the
remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal, ineligible
expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.

SA2P AGO ASHI B PISA |B
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 35 of 43 PageID #: 551
Case22Arnf-00182.M/ADocument seat Ede WOMNRRS 2 PRGRARHUB SPS YH HD ELA.

COUNT EIGHT

71. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

72. Between no later than on or about May 27, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about July 9, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and JASMINE SPENCER, aided and abetted by each other,
knowingly executed and attempted to execute the above-mentioned
scheme.

73. On or about May 27, 2021, defendant KISHA SUTTON caused
the submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to
Financial Institution 1 on behalf of defendant JASMINE SPENCER and
with defendant JASMINE SPENCER’s authorization.

74. The application and the Schedule C stated that defendant
JASMINE SPENCER was a sole proprietor of a business that was
established on January 1, 2017. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

75. In fact, defendant JASMINE SPENCER did. not have a
business in 2020 with those gross receipts and profit. Defendant
JASMINE SPENCER applied for unemployment compensation throughout

2020 and stated, several times, that she was not self-employed.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 36 of 43 PageID #: 552
Case22Aroj-00042.MAPocumhecnt #2nt FreddOMRHAay 2 PRgRaAGDLS SPA AvIa eH BHP

76. Financial Institution 1 funded defendant JASMINE
SPENCER’s PPP loan for $15,625 on or about June 28, 2021.

77. Between on or about June 30, 2021, and on or about July
9, 2021, defendant JASMINE SPENCER, within the Southern District
of West Virginia, remitted $3,000 of the fraudulent PPP loan
proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Defendant JASMINE SPENCER
spent the remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal,
ineligible expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 37 of 43 PageID #: 553
COUNT NINE

78. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 are
hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

79. Between no later than on or about April 8, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about June 21, 2021, defendants
KISHA SUTTON and SHAMIESE WRIGHT and Lydia Spencer, named but not
indicted, aided and abetted by each other, knowingly executed and
attempted to execute the above-mentioned scheme.

80. No later than on or about April 8, 2021, defendant
SHAMIESE WRIGHT recruited Lydia Spencer to participate in the
scheme. At or around the same time, Lydia Spencer provided her
personal and banking information to defendant SHAMIESE WRIGHT for
use in fraudulent PPP applications.

81. On or about April 8, 2021, KISHA SUTTON caused the
submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to Financial
Institution 2 on behalf of Lydia Spencer and with Lydia Spencer’s
authorization.

82. The application and the Schedule C stated that Lydia
Spencer was a sole proprietor of a business, “Les Prints,” that
was established on January 1, 2016. The application stated that in

2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the

2P RABARLIG B PIAA DBS
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 38 of 43 PageID #: 554
192 ViADocument ident Fiddihad

application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

83. In fact, Les Prints did not have those gross receipts
and profit in 2020. Additionally, Lydia Spencer never submitted
the fraudulent Schedule C to the IRS.

84. Financial Institution 2 funded Lydia Spencer’s PPP loan
for $15,625 on or about April 30, 2021.

85. Between on or about May 3, 2021, and on or about May 17,
2021, Lydia Spencer, within the Southern District of West Virginia,
remitted $3,000 of the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds to defendant
KISHA SUTTON. Lydia Spencer spent the remainder of the PPP loan
proceeds on personal, ineligible expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 39 of 43 PageID #: 555
Arel-OAL22 MABSEUmeRieeAt Filed

COUNT TEN

86. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 28 and
78 through 85 are hereby realleged and incorporated herein.

87. Between no later than on or about April 8, 2021, and
continuing until at least on or about June 21, 2021, defendant
KISHA SUTTON and Lydia Spencer, named but not indicted, aided and
abetted by each other, knowingly executed and attempted to execute
the above-mentioned scheme.

88. On or about April 8, 2021, KISHA SUTTON caused the
submission of a PPP loan application and a Schedule C to Financial
Institution 1 on behalf of Lydia Spencer and with Lydia Spencer’s
authorization.

89. The application and the Schedule C stated that Lydia
Spencer was a sole proprietor of a business, “Les Prints,” that
was established on January 1, 2016. The application stated that in
2020, the business had a gross income of $75,000. As part of the
application, a 2020 Schedule C was submitted listing gross receipts
of $75,000 and a net profit of $48,750.

90. In fact, Les Prints did not have those gross receipts
and profit in 2020. Additionally, Lydia Spencer never submitted

the fraudulent Schedule C to the IRS.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 40 of 43 PageID #: 556
(aser2224rey-00182 MADREUMeHSSAt FidedRGis 2p Rea agosE BPRABeHe ts FBS

91. Financial Institution 1 funded Lydia Spencer’s PPP loan
for $15,625 on or about June 21, 2021.

92. On or about June 21, 2021, Lydia Spencer, within the
Southern District of West Virginia, remitted $1,000 of the
fraudulent PPP loan proceeds to defendant KISHA SUTTON. Lydia
Spencer spent the remainder of the PPP loan proceeds on personal,
ineligible expenses.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344

and 2.
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 41 of 43 PageID #: 557
Bie POAeP VABREUMAR Gent FILENAMES) 2 PAGER PRSPRROAY HITS PEY

FORFEITURE

1. The allegations contained in Counts 1 through 10 of this
Superseding Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated by
reference for the purpose of alleging forfeitures pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §§ 981(a) (1) (C) and 982(a) (2), and 28 U.S.C. 2461(c).

2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 (a)(1)(C), 982(a) (2), 28
U.S.C. § 2461(c) and Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, upon conviction of the offenses in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1349, as set forth in Count 1 of this Superseding
Indictment, or violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1344 and 2, as set forth
in Counts 2 through 10 of this Superseding Indictment, any
defendant so convicted shall forfeit to the United States of
America any property constituting, or derived from, proceeds
obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation(s).

4. The property to be forfeited includes, but is not limited
CO:

a. a money judgment in at least the amount of $19,650, such
amount constituting the proceeds of violations set forth
in this Superseding Indictment regarding KISHA SUTTON;

b. a money judgment in at least the amount of $12,625, such

amount constituting the proceeds of violations set forth
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 42 of 43 PageID #: 558
ey 20422 Vv ROEDER bent FrUEhAMORGS op RABaGoPhSPRASRNYiLS?S>

in this Superseding Indictment regarding SHAMIESE

WRIGHT;
. a money judgment in
amount constituting
in this Superseding
- a money judgment in
amount constituting
in this Superseding
- a money judgment in
amount constituting
in this Superseding
- a money judgment in
amount constituting
in this Superseding
and

. a money judgment in
amount constituting
in this

SPENCER.

Superseding

at least the amount of $28,750, such
the proceeds of violations set forth
Indictment regarding CYLENA SUTTON;
at least the amount of $13,975, such
the proceeds of violations set forth
Indictment regarding RAHMEL MEEKINS;
at least the amount of $13,625, such
the proceeds of violations set forth
Indictment regarding WILLIAM POWELL;
at least the amount of $12,125, such
the proceeds of violations set forth

Indictment regarding DAMISHA BROWN;

at least the amount of $12,625, such
the proceeds of violations set forth
Indictment

regarding JASMINE

If any of the property described above, as a result of

cannot be
diligence;

a.

located

any act or omission of the defendant:

upon the exercise of due
Case 2:24-cr-00192     Document 122     Filed 03/05/25     Page 43 of 43 PageID #: 559
ni MAR v MOCUBeEhbe HTUAhAMORAS oFaQeAds Ped PRACA URED

b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with,
a third party;

Gs has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the
court;

d. has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. has been commingled with other property which

cannot be divided without difticoulty,
the United States of America shall be entitled to forfeiture of
substitute property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated
by 18 U.S.C. § 982(b) (1) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c).
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 981

(a) (1) (C), 982(a) (2) and Title 28, United States Code, Section

2461 (c).

WILLIAM S. THOMPSON
United States Attorney

By:

Assistant United States Attorney


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.wvsd.240502.122.0.pdf

Size

14,437,347 bytes

SHA-256

61ac1a9f6c70900d920894b7b8e21fc3c974f1a4e5599d4ffa5fec3a3ef211e6

Our copy

gov.uscourts.wvsd.240502.122.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)