Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings USA v. McCabe United States v. Dustin Sean McCabe — S.D. Fla., No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC First Motion to Sever Defendant sever charges by Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 30, S.D. Fla.)

Court filing

First Motion to Sever Defendant sever charges by Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 30, S.D. Fla.)

Filed December 31, 2024 in USA v. McCabe; one of 219 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Filed2024-12-31

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC · Doc. 30 · 2024-12-31 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,   
 
CASE:. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC-1 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
V. 
 
DUSTIN SEAN MCCABE 
 
Defendant. 
 
____________________________/ 
 
MOTION TO SEVER AND INCORPARATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW 
 
 
COMES NOW, Defendant Dustin Sean McCabe, and moves this Honorable Court, 
pursuant to Rules 8A and 14, of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to sever the charges 
contained in the indictment, for the following reasons: 
 
1. Mr. McCabe is charged in a three count indictment: 
 
a. COUNT 1-  
Seaman’s Manslaughter (18 USC 1115), 
b. COUNT 2 –  False Statement within the Jurisdiction of an agency of the United                           
                                                (18 USC 1001(a)(2), 
c. COUNT 3 – 5  Wire Fraud (18 USC 1343). 
 
2. Count 1 alleges violations of the Seaman’s Manslaughter statute alleging causing the 
death of M.C.G.F which occurred on March 5, 2020. 
 
3. Count 2-5 allege financial fraudulent activity alleging activities occurring from February 
2, 2021, thru August 9, 2021. 
 
4. The manslaughter counts and the financial fraud counts have completely unrelated and 
separate victims.  
 
5. These counts will hopelessly prejudice the Jury against Mr. McCabe. 
 
The allegation that Mr. McCabe did make knowing and fictitious fraudulent representations to 
various banks and agencies regarding financial matters (loans) has no rational relationship to the 
charge of Seaman’s Manslaughter. 
 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 12/31/2024   Page 1 of 3

The prejudicial impact of advising the jury that Mr. Cabe has committed 4 additional, fraud 
related crimes, in addition to the Seaman’s Manslaughter, would be considerable. Disclosing to 
the jury that Mr. McCabe received financial gain from the government subsequent to the death of 
M.C.G.F would all but guarantee that Mr. McCabe would not receive a fair trial. 
 
Under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure two or more offenses may be charged 
in the same indictment or information if the charges are of the same or similar character, are 
based upon the same act or transaction, or on two or more acts connected together or constituting 
parts of a common scheme or plan.  Joinder of parties and defendants under Rule 8 is designed to 
promote judicial economy and efficiency. United States v. Davis, 773 F.2nd 1180 (11th Cir. 1985). 
It is the government’s burden to show that the initial joinder is proper under Rule 8. United 
States v. Davis, supra. But the question of whether the initial joinder is proper under Rule 8 is to 
be determined before trial by an examination by the trial court of the allegations stated on the 
face of the indictment. United States v. Weaver, 905 F.2d 1466 (11th Cir. 1990). United States v. 
Morales, 868 F.2d 1562 (11th Cir. 1989). 
 
Going to the indictment, the government has clearly failed to meet this burden.  Mr. McCabe is 
charged with Seaman’s Manslaughter and a totally separate financial fraud crime with totally 
separate and individual victims. These offenses are not of the same or similar character. They are 
not based upon the same acts or transactions, nor common scheme or plan.  Clearly, under Rule 
8, joinder would be highly prejudicial and erroneous. 
 
Rule 14 provides that if it appears that a defendant is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of 
defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the Court may 
order an election or separate trials or provide whatever other relief justice requires.  Rule 14 
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 
 
The case law suggests that improper joinder may be harmless unless it results in actual prejudice. 
United States v. Weaver, supra. In this cause, the jury is going to be called to determine whether, 
based upon Mr. McCabe’s business practices in 2021, he did in fact commit Seaman’s 
Manslaughter in 2020. The initial allegation, totally unrelated to the fraud charges, if presented to 
a jury, would “result in actual prejudice because it “had substantial and injurious effect or 
influence in determining the jury’s verdict” Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 66 S.Ct. 
1239, 90 L.Ed. 1557 (1946). The mere allegations of presenting both Count 1 (Seaman’s 
Manslaughter) and Counts 2-5 (Fraud) to the jury would be sufficient to cause a jury to stray 
from the real issues in this case. 
 
Finally, Mr. McCabe’s right to testify on his own behalf would be compromised. Depending on 
the development of this case, it may be advisable for Mr. McCabe to testify in the Seaman’s 
Manslaughter case but not the fraud cases.  The improper joinder of the counts could prevent Mr. 
McCabe from exercising this right in a meaningful fashion. United States v. Holloway, 1 F.3d 
307 (5th Cir. 1993). 
 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 12/31/2024   Page 2 of 3

Wherefore, the Defendant hereby moves this Honorable Court to sever Count 1 from Counts 2-5. 
 
Respectfully submitted,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TERRENCE O’SULLIVAN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3810 Murrell Road #340 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rockledge, Florida 32955 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
321-422-2882 (office) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
321-848-2144 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CALISHA A. FRANCIS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3920 Woodside Drive #10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Coral Springs, Florida 33065 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
954-612-6126 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was electronically 
noticed through the CM/ECF system to Zachary A. Keller, AUSA, and all other parties of record, 
on this 30th Day of December, 2024. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TERRENCE O’SULLIVAN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3810 Murrell Road #340 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rockledge, Florida 32955 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
321-422-2882 (office) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
321-848-2144 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Terrence J. O’Sullivan, Esq. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TERRENCE J. O’SULLIVAN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Attorney for the defendant 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Florida Bar Number: 0644031 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Terrence@TerrenceOSullivanLaw.com 
 
CALISHA A. FRANCIS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3920 Woodside Drive #10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Coral Springs, Florida 33065 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
954-612-6126 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Calisha A. Francis, Esq. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CALISHA A. FRANCIS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Attorney for the Defendant 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Florida Bar Number: 96348 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
cthomlaw@aol.com 
 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 30   Entered on FLSD Docket 12/31/2024   Page 3 of 3

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.30.0.pdf
Size
157,766 bytes
SHA-256
a93ecf9c98f1153e424c0eea9a40b63bdf1246bf6b1638dee76e9af772de2b12
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.30.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top