Court filing
Unopposed Motion for Reconsideration re 29 Order on Motion to Continue Trial — USA v. Rendon (Dkt. 32, S.D. Fla.)
Filed March 10, 2023 in USA v. Rendon; one of 83 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2023-03-10 |
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 1:23-cr-20036-KMM · Doc. 32 · 2023-03-10 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO: 23-CR-20036-MOORE
UNITED STATES,
v.
DANIELA RENDON,
Defendant.
___________________________/
THE GOVERNMENT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ORDER
DENYING THE DEFENDANT’S AGREED MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE
The United States of America (“the Government”), by and through the undersigned Assis-
tant United State Attorney, hereby files this Motion to Reconsider the Court’s Order Denying the
Defendant Daniela Rendon’s Agreed Motion to Continue [ECF No. 29]. The Defendant does not
oppose this motion.
BACKGROUND
From 2020 until 2022, the Defendant is alleged to have defrauded the Economic Injury
Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) and Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), and received approximately
$381,290 in proceeds. The Defendant is charged by indictment with seven counts of wire fraud,
in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343; two counts of money laundering, in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957; and one count of aggravated identity theft,
in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1028A(a)(1) [ECF No. 1].
The Defendant had her initial appearance on February 2, 2023 [ECF No. 7], and a pretrial
detention hearing was held on February 3, 2023 [ECF No. 11]. The Defendant was represented
by Samuel Rabin, Jr. [ECF No. 8]. After the detention hearing, undersigned spoke with Mr. Rabin
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 1 of 6
-2-
to discuss providing discovery, and Mr. Rabin said that he needed a week to enter a permanent
appearance. On February 9, 2023, another attorney, Robert Mandell, was added as counsel [ECF
No. 14]. Mr. Mandell practices in Orlando, Florida.
The Defendant entered her bond [ECF No. 16], and was arraigned on February 13, 2023
[ECF No. 19]. On February 15, 2023, the undersigned produced discovery to Mr. Mandell and
entered the First Response to the Standing Discovery Order [ECF No. 22]. Calendar call is sched-
uled for March 23, 2023.
On March 6, 2023, the Defendant filed the Agreed Motion to Continue, asking for a con-
tinuance until the end of 2023 [ECF No. 24]. The Defendant explained that this complex case
involved voluminous discovery and that the Defense and the Government wished for more time to
thoroughly prepare [ECF No. 24, at 2]. The Court denied the Motion, explaining that “the [p]arties
provide no factual justification for their requested continuance other than the purported complexity
of the case,” and that, “without more,” the Court did not find good cause for the continuance [ECF
No. 29].
DISCUSSION
The Government respectfully requests that the Court reconsider the Defendant’s Agreed
Motion to Continue because “the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best
interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3161(7)(A). In compliance
with the Court’s Scheduling Order, [ECF No. 20], the Government wishes to “set forth in detail
which factors constitute grounds for a continuance” under Title 18, United States Code, Section
3161(7)(B).
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 2 of 6
-3-
Discovery
The discovery in this case is voluminous. It comprises the email accounts, cloud drive,
and social media profiles for the Defendant, as well as the email, cloud drive, and social media
accounts for the Defendant’s alleged accomplice, who has been charged and is pending sentencing
before this Court. See United States v. Lorquet, 22-CR-20326-KMM.
At least three e-mail accounts were used to commit the Defendant’s fraud, and the e-mail
accounts blend both personal and professional communications. Together, there are approximately
60,814 records within the three accounts. The discovery in this case also includes bank and finan-
cial records for the Defendant’s two companies, Rendon Holdings LLC and Daniela Rendon, PA,
both of which the Defendant used to apply for fraudulent COVID-relief loans. The discovery for
the Bank of America accounts alone totals 952 pages.
The discovery related to the Defendant’s fraudulent applications is also voluminous. The
Defendant submitted fraudulent applications to multiple loan processors or participating lenders,
sometimes multiple times. For example, the discovery related to the EIDL loan contains ten ap-
plication files, each of which include SBA e-mail traffic, call records, and internal workflow notes.
The discovery in this case is data-intensive, too. Because the Defendant’s fraud is alleged to have
occurred over two years, the Defendant’s e-mail and cloud drive contains approximately 30 giga-
bytes of electronic data. And because the Defendant alleged herself to be a social media “influ-
encer,” her social media accounts are densely packed as well. This photographic and video evi-
dence is relevant and must be reviewed, and doing so will take time and resources, both for the
Government and for the Defendant.
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 3 of 6
-4-
Trial Preparation
Allowing the Defendant the opportunity to thoroughly review this evidence is better for
the public, better for the Defendant, and, the undersigned believes, better for the Court. The un-
dersigned and Mr. Mandell have conferred and hope to limit the evidentiary issues in this case by
arriving at joint stipulations as to the authenticity or admissibility of the evidence. Given the wide
scope of the Defendant’s fraud, the parties would also like time to brief the Court on the issues or
facts with which they may disagree.
Mr. Mandell and the undersigned also have scheduling conflicts that will prevent our abil-
ity to adequately prepare for this before trial before the March 23, 2023 calendar call. The under-
signed is scheduled to try a COVID-relief fraud case before the Honorable Robert N. Scola in the
second week of his upcoming calendar, on March 20, 2023. See United States v. Rollins, 22-CR-
20464-RNS. And Mr. Mandell is scheduled to try an attempted murder case in Lake County,
Florida, on March 27, 2023. See Lake County v. Johnson, 2022-CF-002497. That case, Mr. Man-
dell informs the undersigned, has reached the end of the trial clock and must proceed.
Mr. Mandell, who practices in the Middle District of Florida, has also been unable to meet
with his client, who is under pretrial release in the Southern District Florida. Although Mr. Man-
dell was scheduled to meet with the Defendant in Orlando, Florida on March 8, 2023, the Defend-
ant’s motion to travel was denied because it did not list the position of the supervising pretrial
services officer [ECF No. 27]. The Defendant has filed an amended motion to travel, however,
which was granted on March 8, 2023 [ECF No. 30]. The Defendant should be given the opportu-
nities to meet with her chosen counsel to review the discovery in this case.
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 4 of 6
-5-
Mr. Mandell and the undersigned have also discussed a resolution to this case, and the
Government has provided Mr. Mandell a draft plea agreement. The parties are working faithfully
towards a resolution.
Witness Coordination
The undersigned requests a continuance to allow the Defendant an opportunity to meet
with her counsel, to allow Mr. Mandell an opportunity to fully review the evidence, and to allow
the Government time to coordinate its trial witnesses. The undersigned expects trial in this case
to take between five and seven days. Witnesses will include representatives from internet service
providers, out-of-state PPP participating lenders, the Small Business Administration, the Internal
Revenue Service, the Florida Department of Revenue, forensic analysts and special agents with
the Department of Homeland Security, as well as accountants, the Defendant’s alleged accomplice,
and her associates. Because of the extent of COVID-relief fraud in general, and because the
COVID-relief programs are no longer active, the PPP participating lenders and SBA have a limited
amount of people who are competent to testify. Allowing the Government some flexibility in
timing to accommodate and confirm the availability of these witnesses will ensure—if this case is
to go to trial—that it will be run efficiently, with no moment of the jury’s or witnesses’ time un-
used.
The Defendant’s Agreed Motion to Continue is the first to be sought in this case, and the
undersigned continues to agree that the Defendant’s Motion is merited. This Court has granted
ends-of-justice continuances in cases with less complex facts and less voluminous discovery and
where, as here, counsel for the defendant had either a preplanned obligation, such as vacation, or
needed additional time to review the evidence. See United States v. Neal, 19-CR-20648-MOORE
(Nov. 1, 2019) (granting a motion until January 21, 2020 where the defendant was charged with
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 5 of 6
-6-
carjacking and the discovery consisted of a “significant number of audio and video recordings”);
United States v. Calderon, 21-C-20183 (May 27, 2021) (granting a motion to continue until August
21, 2021 where the government provided “5000+ documents to review” and that “it will take con-
siderable time—in coordination with counsel’s client—to properly review and digest the materi-
als”). And, similar to here, this Court has granted a continuance where the Defendant lived in one
city (Big Pine Key, Florida) and the defense counsel lived in another (Miami, Florida), and the
large amount of fraud discovery had to be reviewed with the Defendant in person. See United
States v. Conkright, 19-CR-10017-MOORE (Dec. 3, 2019) (granting a motion to continue where
the defendant’s car was destroyed in a hurricane and the discovery contained “extensive reports,
records and financial data pertaining to what is alleged to be a substantial fraud offense”).
A continuance of 60 days in this matter will serve the ends of the justice. It will serve the
Defendant, who herself seeks the continuance; it will serve the Government, who works to gain
approval for a non-trial resolution; and it will serve the Court and the public, including the jurors
and witnesses, by allowing for a coordinated, informative, and efficient trial.
Respectfully submitted on March 10, 2023,
MARKENZY LAPOINTE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
BY:
Jonathan Bailyn
Jonathan R. Bailyn, AUSA
Court ID No. A5502602
99 Northeast Fourth Street, 6th Floor
Miami, Florida 33132-2111
Phone: (305) 961-9071
jonathan.bailyn@usdoj.gov
Case 1:23-cr-20036-KMM Document 32 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/10/2023 Page 6 of 6File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.flsd.627608.32.0.pdf
- Size
- 191,758 bytes
- SHA-256
- 9d1308be8cacd20f8d31d3e07b1f43cdb4bef7299c47c417a6afde8b8e2854d5
- Original
- PACER (login required)