Court filing
Criminal Complaint — U.S. v. Maurice… (Doc. 144, 1:20-cr-00228, record 278524)
Filed January 26, 2021 in United States v. Maurice Fayne; one of 156 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2021-01-26 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia · No. 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL · Doc. 144 · 2021-01-26 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
Plaintiff, ) CRIMINAL ACTION FILE
v. ) NO. 1:20-MJ-370
)
MAURICE FAYNE,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________)
--------------------------------------------------------------
BEFORE THE HONORABLE JUSTIN S. ANAND
TRANSCRIPT OF TAPED PROCEEDINGS
MAY 13, 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff: OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY
(By: Russell Phillips
Bernita Malloy
Michael Brown)
For the Defendant: LAW OFFICE OF TANYA F. MILLER
(By: Tanya F. Miller)
Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography
and computer-aided transcript produced by
JANA B. COLTER, FAPR, RMR, CRR, CRC
Official Court Reporter
1949 U.S. Courthouse
75 Ted Turner Drive, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
(404) 215-1456
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 1 of 30
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
_ _ _
P R O C E E D I N G S
(Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, May 13, 2020, in open
court.)
THE COURT: -- 1:20-MJ-370, representing the
United States is Assistant U.S. Attorney, Russell Phillips.
And I understand, Mr. Phillips, you're appearing by telephone;
is that right?
MR. PHILLIPS: I am, Your Honor. Thank you for
letting me do that.
THE COURT: Of course.
MR. PHILLIPS: In addition, my co-counsel,
Bernita Malloy and Mike Brown are on the line as well.
THE COURT: Okay. Good afternoon to both -- to all
of you.
MS. MALLOY: Good afternoon, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And we have -- is it Tanya Miller; is
that right?
MS. MILLER: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Tanya Miller representing
Mr. Fayne.
Mr. Fayne, you're here because you've been arrested
on the -- and, by the way, can you hear me okay?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 2 of 30
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
THE COURT: It's awkward with the mask.
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I just want to make sure that you can
hear me.
You've been arrested on the basis of a criminal
complaint that charges you with the offense of bank fraud in
violation of U.S. law Title 18 United States Code Section 1344.
Do you have a copy of that complaint and the affidavit?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Okay. And so do you have an
understanding of what it is that you've been charged with in
this case?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Okay. Let me advise you that you have
the right to remain silent. The government can't force you to
make any statements relating in any way whatsoever to any of
the facts that may be pertinent to this case.
If you make statements, what you say could be used
against you, it could be used against you in the prosecution of
this case, including at trial or other proceedings that may
occur in the case, or in other cases that you may face now or
in the future including other criminal or civil cases of any
sort.
So my advice to you is that you not make statements
relating in any way whatsoever to the facts of this matter to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 3 of 30
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
the police, law enforcement or other representatives of the
government unless you first consult with your lawyer, who
represents you in the case, about whether you should do so.
You have the right to a lawyer to advise and
represent you and defend you throughout these proceedings and
to be present with you if you choose to speak to
representatives of the government. You can hire a lawyer of
your own choosing, if you have the means to do so, and here
it's my understanding that you've retained Ms. Miller to
represent you in this case; is that right?
THE DEFENDANT: That's correct.
MS. MILLER: That's correct, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. But let me just advise you that
you do have the right to apply for court-appointed counsel if
you were unable to pay for a privately retained lawyer. In
other words, you'd have the right to -- if you could make a
showing that you lacked the ability to pay a lawyer, you'd
still be entitled to have a lawyer appointed for you free of
charge by the Court.
But I understand that's not an application you're
making today because you have retained counsel, Ms. Miller.
All right. Being that you are charged on a criminal
complaint, which is not an indictment passed by a grand jury,
the grand jury in this district is on temporary suspension
because of the coronavirus outbreak, you have the right to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 4 of 30
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
what's known as a preliminary hearing.
Now, a preliminary hearing is not in itself a trial.
It would be a brief summary hearing where the question before
the Court would be is there probable cause, sufficient evidence
to show probable cause that you have, in fact, committed the
offense charged.
Probable cause is a legal term, but basically means
viewing the evidence at this juncture in the case in the light
most favorable to the prosecution, that there is sufficient
evidence to believe that -- that it's more likely than not that
you've committed this crime.
At a preliminary hearing, the government would not be
obliged to call all or even any of the same witnesses it may
later call at trial, it would be permissible for the
prosecution to call one or more law enforcement officers to
summarize the results of an investigation, even if they may not
have personal knowledge of all the facts that they're
testifying to.
But you have the right to have that happen, to be
present, to hear that testimony, to cross-examine any witnesses
the government may call through your lawyer, and you could
introduce your -- evidence yourself on the question of probable
cause, if you wished, but you'd have no obligation to do so.
The preliminary hearing is something you -- you
could, if you wished to have it, be present for, that's your
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 5 of 30
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
choice, but we also could hold the proceeding remotely by video
or telephonic means at your consent.
Ms. Miller, does he wish to have a preliminary
hearing in this case?
MS. MILLER: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. In terms of bond, I understand the
government is not moving to detain; is that correct?
MR. PHILLIPS: That's correct, Your Honor, but we are
asking for an ankle monitor. And at the appropriate time, I
would like to just state briefly the reasons that we believe
that's appropriate.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Well, I was about to
turn to the issue of bond at this time, so, Mr. Fayne, let me
just explain, the government is not moving to detain you, in
other words, they're not contesting that you should be released
on conditions of bail or bond, but they are asking for more
restrictive conditions in the form of an ankle monitor than are
recommended from the pretrial services office in their report,
it seems, and I'll hear from Mr. Phillips in a moment about
that.
But -- well, let me do that now. Mr. Phillips, let
me -- let me hear you now on the appropriate conditions of
bond.
MR. PHILLIPS: Yes, Your Honor. First of all, just a
little bit of background about the nature of the charges. The
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 6 of 30
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
defendant is the sole owner of a Georgia corporation called
Flame Trucking. And on April the 15th, he signed and submitted
an application for a paycheck protection program loan in the
name of Flame Trucking, and he submitted that application to
the United Community Bank, which is a federally insured
institution.
In that application, he stated that his business had
107 employees and an average monthly payroll of $1,490,200 and
he asked for a loan in the amount of $3,725,500.
In that application, he certified that the loan
proceeds would be used to, quote, retain workers and maintain
payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments and
utility payments as specified under the paycheck protection
program rules.
Ultimately, the bank loaned Mr. Fayne $2,045,800, the
amount that he sought was reduced, although it was originally
put into an account, it was reduced to that $2 million figure
to comply with the regulations under the program because of the
number of employees and the salaries that they had.
Within days after getting that $2 million into his
account in the name of Flame Trucking, we believe the evidence
will show that he used more than $1.5 million of that to
purchase $85,000 in custom-made jewelry, including a Rolex
watch, a diamond bracelet and a 5.73 carrot diamond ring for
himself. He paid $40,000 in child support, and he also wired
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 7 of 30
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
$232,000 of the loan proceeds to his personal account at Navy
Federal Credit Union.
And shortly after wiring that money into his account
on May 1st, he paid $136,000 to a company up in New Jersey to
lease a Rolls-Royce, a 2019 Rolls-Royce, which was also seized
pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by this Court.
The jewelry and over $500,000 in PPP loan proceeds in
various bank accounts was seized pursuant to seizure warrants.
In addition, we obtained a search warrant for the defendant's
residence in Gwinnett County, and that was executed on Monday
of this week, May the 11th, and at that time, agents seized a
bag that had $70,000 in cash that was still wrapped up in bank
wrappers and another $9,400 that Mr. Fayne had in his pants
pocket. That's when they also seized the jewelry at the
residence.
We obtained the search warrant, or rather the seizure
warrant, for the Rolls-Royce. We didn't have all of the
information that we received this morning, so we confirmed this
morning that the $136,000 upfront lease payment on the
Rolls-Royce came out of the PPP loan proceeds, that is a
$132,000 wire from Flame Trucking to the defendant's personal
account at Navy Federal Credit Union, which led to the payment
on the Rolls-Royce.
And so that's the background about the charges. And
the reason that we're asking for more restrictive conditions of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 8 of 30
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
pretrial release is because when we obtained the defendant's
phone in the search, the FBI conducted a search and we found
some things on that that were concerning.
First of all, the -- I should say that the case
agents from the FBI and the Small Business Administration
Office of Inspector General interviewed Mr. Fayne on May the
6th. The next day, May the 7th, the defendant's phone shows
that he started conducting research into, quote, countries that
will not extradite to the United States, close quote. Also, he
searched, quote, does Dubai extradite to the U.S., close quote.
He searched countries with no extradition treaty with
the U.S. And he searched what -- costs of living life in
Dubai, he searched islands that don't have extradition, and he
searched wire fraud punishment. This was all within 24 hours
or probably a little bit less of being interviewed by federal
agents concerning the charges in this case.
So we're -- we're concerned about that. We also take
into consideration in making our recommendation the fact that
the defendant hired an attorney. His attorney contacted the
FBI and me and was cooperative in having the defendant turn
himself in shortly after we informed counsel that we had an
arrest warrant for the defendant, and he did voluntarily go to
the FBI office this morning and turn himself in and turn over
the Rolls-Royce pursuant to the seizure warrant.
He was also cooperative with the agents during the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 9 of 30
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
searches -- or during the search of his residence when they
seized various items, but one thing that that -- that happened
there was also a little bit concerning, and that is when agents
knocked on the door to execute the search warrant, they had
various agents posted around the perimeter of the residence,
and one of those agents was outside the basement door and the
agents believe that Mr. Fayne was attempting to leave through
the basement door until he saw that there was an agent posted
outside. He then went back up the steps. When the agents went
downstairs into the basement to search it, they found virtually
nothing except the bag that had the $70,000 in cash.
So there was some fear that he was attempting at that
time or would have attempted to leave the premises rather than
submit to search, if there had not been an agent posted
outside.
So that combined with the searches on his phone
concerning extradition and punishment are concerning and we
thought about moving for detention, but because of the
circumstances and because he did hire an attorney and did
voluntarily turn himself in and cooperate thus far, we've
elected to take a chance and move for an ankle monitor instead
of moving for detention.
In addition to that, we would ask that the defendant
be required to turn over his passport. It's my understanding
that his lawyer already has that passport in her possession and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 10 of 30
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
that she's prepared to turn that over today. And we would ask
that the defendant not be permitted to travel outside the
district.
Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Ms. Miller, any response on
the request for electronic monitoring?
MS. MILLER: Thank you, Your Honor. I -- just in
case the Court can't hear me, I don't know if you can -- can
you hear me with the mask?
THE COURT: Yeah, I can hear you. Yeah, you can
leave it on. Yeah, I'd appreciate it if you would leave it on.
MS. MILLER: Leave it on, okay.
THE COURT: Yeah.
MS. MILLER: I just didn't know if you could hear me.
Judge, I certainly understand why my colleague is asking for
that. He did tell me in advance that he planned to ask for
that.
I would just suggest to the Court that those searches
were conducted, as has been represented to me, I have no
ability to -- or no reason to challenge that, as I understand
it, that wasn't the first time he'd searched things like that
in connection with conversations that he was having, not
because he intended to do anything, more or less it was --
without going into detail -- just a conversation with somebody
else about what was going on.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 11 of 30
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
And I would say, Your Honor, the fact that he
searched something when he has literally made -- every action
that he has taken has been to cooperate with the government,
meaning that he spoke to the agents voluntarily without
counsel, meaning that he was present in the home when they
searched, he did not flee. He handed over everything that they
asked for, his phones, everything.
He obtained counsel when he realized that, you know,
the situation was obviously something that he needed advice on.
He has been supremely cooperative with me. He asked me to
affirmatively reach out to the government to let them know
that, which I did, before they got the arrest warrant.
Once -- and volunteered to -- to surrender him if
they, at some point, got one. We did not know what their plan
was. They called me at 6:30 this morning saying that they had
an arrest warrant for him and he needed to turn himself in
immediately. I immediately got up and got Mr. Fayne on the
phone, told him what was happening, told him what their request
was regarding the Rolls-Royce. He immediately sprang into
action to do everything that I asked him to do.
I asked the agents if we could bring him and the car
by 10:30. The agent said that was fine, and we were there at
10:30 on the dot, as we promised and represented to them.
So I think the recommendation by pretrial is
appropriate. Although I understand why my colleague is asking
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 12 of 30
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
for -- I understand why that would be concerning, so I'm not
going to poo-poo that, because I certainly understand that.
But I can tell you that if you look at his actions
and you look at his history and you look at what he has done in
this case, it indicates nothing but an intent to be present, to
answer to these accusations, to defend himself appropriately,
to cooperate when it's appropriate.
And I would suggest that based on his actions,
Your Honor, that the bond as recommended by pretrial would
be -- would be appropriate. So that's all I would say on it,
Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Couple of questions.
Mr. Phillips, first, is all the money accounted for?
MR. PHILLIPS: It is not, Your Honor. As I said, the
amount of money that was actually funded into the defendant's
account was a little bit over $2 million. We've seized a
little bit over $500,000 from various accounts and I told you
about the money that we seized in cash.
But while we were in the process of applying for
seizure warrants for various banks, at least one of those
accounts that we were looking at was cleaned out and another
one, there was some money taken out of that before we could get
to those.
I don't know what happened to that money. I know
that the bank records indicate that the defendant made a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 13 of 30
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
$65,000 cash withdrawal. And keep in mind all of this happened
in a fairly short time period. The loan was funded on April
the 22nd, and the bank records indicate that the defendant
started wiring the money out of the account the next day on
April the 23rd.
There were wires for $175,000 to a person in Miami
named Trice Baum. I don't know who that is. I Googled it.
That's the only information I have on it. I'm not sure who
that person is.
There were only a couple of transactions that
appeared to be related in name to some aspect of the trucking
business. One of those was a TransAm Trucking Exchange and
there was another one to Great Dane, LLC.
The other transfers were to individuals, $350,000 to
a woman named Kawanza Wilkins, and she's also the person who
then wired money to the jewelry store and wired money to pay
for the defendant's child support. We don't know what happened
to the remainder of that $350,000, that was only, let's see, 84
plus 40, $124,000 out of that 350 that was accounted for.
Then there were individual transactions that appeared
to be payments on loans, one for $30,000, another for $50,000.
Some unidentified people in Arkansas. One received $25,000,
another received $75,000 on back-to-back days. A man named
Jamal Shepard in Little Rock, Arkansas. He got $75,000 on
April 23rd, another $75,000 on April the 24th.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 14 of 30
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
And then two very concerning transactions where the
defendant wired money from the business's account to his
personal account. He wired himself $90,000 on April the 28th,
and he wired himself another $142,000 just a couple of days
later on May the 1st. And May the 1st is the day that he sent
the $136,000 to the company that leased the Rolls-Royce to him.
And so those are concerning. So there is some cash
that's unaccounted for. The amount that was wired out of the
account plus the amount that we seized in the various accounts
comes up over the $2 million, but we don't know what happened
to the other -- to the other money after it was wired to these
individuals.
Judging from the fact that the defendant, according
to the interview of Kawanza Wilkins, instructed Ms. Wilkins to
make surreptitious wire transfers on his behalf, it appears
that the defendant was doing that in order to disguise the
source of the money.
So again, there is some money missing. We don't know
exactly how much, but a substantial amount that -- that
somebody could use to leave the district if they were so
inclined and the fact that he was actively involved in
depleting some of these accounts at the same time that the
U.S. Attorney's Office and the federal agents, the FBI and
Small Business Administration, LIG were in the process of
trying to get seizure warrants, you know, that's disturbing.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 15 of 30
16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
It indicates that if we hadn't acted as quickly as we did that
we might not have been able to seize all of the money that we
did, and even more that would have disappeared.
So I don't have a specific answer for your question,
but that's what the evidence to date shows. It's not all
accounted for. And a lot of it was moved around in cash and
wire transfers to individuals who could have converted it to
cash. And we're still in the process of trying to track down
all of the bank records related to those transactions.
THE COURT: All right.
MS. MILLER: May I respond, Judge? Just --
THE COURT: You may. And also I wanted to hear a
little bit more about -- from the -- about the defendant's job,
Flame Trucking, is that -- what's the nature of his day-to-day
work? And does that entail travel? Trucking suggests travel,
so --
MS. MILLER: Okay.
THE COURT: -- so what's the nature of his
involvement in that company and does it involve travel?
MS. MILLER: Yes, Your Honor. So let me answer that
question first, and then I guess I'll go back to --
THE COURT: Umm-hmm.
MS. MILLER: -- my understanding of what might be
going on in the bank account, although, you know, I think that
this investigation is still ongoing and there's still questions
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 16 of 30
17
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
about it.
For the most part, he is stationed in Atlanta. He
does occasionally do over-the-road driving himself, but that is
a rare -- that's a rarity. He usually does not actually drive
the trucks. There are drivers who drive the trucks. So
certainly, you know, if there is a condition of his bond that
he has to remain in the district, absent specific permission
either from the Court or pretrial services, that is certainly
something that he can comply with.
He is -- he is -- his job is not daily driving over
the road, either in the district, outside of the district or
outside of the state. That does happen occasionally, but that
is not the regular, so that I think unless you have more
questions about that, that answers that.
THE COURT: Um-hmm.
MS. MILLER: Then as the bank account is concerned, I
understand my colleague has questions and he did share with me
that they were still investigating and trying to trace down
where some of these wires went, that some of these wires
appeared to be, at least from the government's perspective, on
initial review, legitimate wires related to business.
Then there are other wires that are questionable, as
I understand from the government. However, I also -- it's also
my understanding that many, if not most of these wires, there
may have been seven or something like that, were -- were taken
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 17 of 30
18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
back by the bank. So while the wires may have initially gone
through that -- that all or part of them were then sort of
taken back or frozen by the bank. And then ultimately, the
whole account was frozen.
So I'm not saying there isn't some cash that made its
way into his personal account, as the government has indicated.
And I think as he has admitted to the government during the
interview, I'm not sure if that came -- if that was
specifically asked and he answered that, but I just don't -- I
think there are -- I guess my point is, Judge, there are still
questions about where this money has gone.
And I don't know that it is completely accurate to
say that $2 million of it is yet to be accounted for. I just
don't know that that's accurate. And if the government
suspects that, that's one thing, but unless the government
definitely knows that, I think that that's a -- that's a
different issue.
They took all the cash that he had in his house.
And, you know, at this point, he -- he -- all his accounts are
frozen. So I'm not sure where he's going to get these funds
from or if there are funds out there that the government can
point to specifically that he has access to. I just don't
know.
But I will just offer to the Court, and I guess my
colleague can respond to it, it's my understanding that most of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 18 of 30
19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
the wires that were suspicious have either been called back by
the bank or those monies have been frozen in some capacity.
I suspect the bank could probably answer that
question with relative ease, but I just wanted to offer that to
the Court as well.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Mr. Fayne, I'm going
to grant the bond. And of course there's no request for
otherwise. The government is not moving for detention. I am
going to agree to the condition of locational monitoring. That
is a relatively light condition, and I do think it's suggested
here, the nature of the searches on the phone that were
represented by Mr. Phillips are obviously concerning when it
comes to the question of flight.
Now, you know actually fleeing and becoming an
expatriate on the run and living only in non-extraditable
countries is easier contemplated than actually done. But the
fact that it was even contemplated is of concern.
The -- I don't know the exact ins or outs on the
monetary situation, which is still being investigated, but I do
hear specific facts to suggest that there's at least some money
paid to third parties for which the circumstances haven't been
entirely identified and so there may be money paid to others
that would still be available to the defendant in some
capacity.
But really the very specific and concerning thought
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 19 of 30
20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
process of fleeing to a non-extraditable country in advance of
law enforcement action is enough for me to give significant
pause here. In other circumstances, I think it would be -- and
I've seen the prosecution ask for detention in cases such as
that, and detention to be granted in cases where facts like
that have been presented.
Here, that's not being requested and not -- and I'm
not going to -- and I don't think it's appropriate for me to
overrule that. And I think part of the reason is because of
the other facts and circumstances, a lot of which Ms. Miller
has very effectively explained, because it is of great credit
to you, Mr. Fayne and something that the Court very much
considers in your favor that you cooperated, that you appeared
voluntarily, that you very -- you took the responsible step of
hiring counsel, who then contacted the government, and you
cooperated with the surrender, both of the property, the car
and as well as yourself to the warrant and that's of great
credit, and probably the reason why you're not facing a motion
for detention from the government.
But I don't think it goes so far as to completely
negate the other circumstances that Mr. Phillips has explained
and that I've described, and I think that that justifies the
step of a locational monitor, at least at this time, so I will
grant that request.
The conditions are therefore as follows: It will be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 20 of 30
21
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
a $10,000 unsecured bond, meaning you're not paying any money
right now. You are just securing the bond with your signature.
In other words, you're promising that you can be -- that you
would forfeit the amount of $10,000, have that judgment entered
against you, essentially, if you were to violate your bond.
But let me just say this, if you were to violate your
bond, that would be, by far, the least of all of the very bad
things that would result from a violation of your bond. Much
more importantly, a violation of bond is grounds to revoke the
bond, you could be revoked, meaning put back in jail for the
remainder of the case.
And Ms. Miller, I think, would be the first to advise
you that there's many reasons why that would not be what you
want, even beyond the obvious, that you don't want to be in
jail. First, it would make it far harder for her to work with
you and prepare and defend you in this case. It's much easier
for her to work with you if you're free and out and she can
meet with you in your home or in her office or all of that.
Also, if you are revoked on a bond, that can be
considered against you in the event that you are facing a
sentencing from the district judge or you've been sentenced and
the Bureau of Prisons is trying to determine what level of
classification, what sort of institution you might be sentenced
to.
Someone on a purely financial crime, it might be that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 21 of 30
22
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
you'd be eligible to be placed at a particular location that
may be of lower security than somewhere else, but if you've
been revoked on a bond, then that could ruin your chances at
that sort of designation and make you have to go to a much more
severe institution, so --
Now, that wouldn't be for the Court to decide, that's
for the Bureau of Prisons, but there's any number of reasons
why violating your bond and being revoked would not be what you
want to do. In, also some circumstances, failure to appear for
court while on a bond can be a new and separate crime for which
you can be separately charged and convicted and sentenced. In
fact, even if you're innocent of the fraud charge that you're
facing, you could -- that would be no defense if you were to
commit the offense of bail jumping from my bond. So the
$10,000 you would forfeit would, as I say, be only the tip of
the iceberg.
You are required to surrender any and all passports
you may have to the pretrial services office. And it sounds
like your lawyer already has the passport. Okay. Great.
You're going to meet with pretrial --
Ms. Crawford, do you want them to come to your
office?
PRETRIAL SERVICES OFFICER: Yes, they'll come to the
9th floor. He'll come to the 9th floor.
THE COURT: So Ms. Crawford with the Pretrial
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 22 of 30
23
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Services Office is who you will meet with and surrender that
passport to. And you'll do it after you're concluded here
today. You'll go -- her office is on the 9th floor, and so
when you -- you're -- Mr. Fayne, you're not going to be
released from this room, the agents here are going to take you
back down to the 16th floor, marshals' lockup, and the marshals
will release you from there on the 16th floor.
And that's where your lawyer can meet you. And just
don't leave the building before you go to the 9th floor and
meet with Ms. Crawford from the Pretrial Services Department.
And, again, that's where you'll surrender the passport.
Don't obtain or possess or apply for any other
passport or travel documents, whether in your name or anyone
else's name. You must keep your place of residence, your work
and your telephone number -- I guess another way of saying it
is don't change any of those things before first consulting and
notifying the pretrial services officer, who is -- who is
supervising your release. In other words, they need to know at
all times where you're living, working and can be reached.
You're to avoid all contact, directly or indirectly,
with anyone who you have reason to believe would be a victim or
potential witness in this case. And I encourage the government
to give Ms. Miller a list of potential witnesses or
participants to put Mr. Fayne on as much notice as possible;
however, if they fail to do that, that's not an excuse. If
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 23 of 30
24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
there's someone who it is later proven that you knew or very
well should have known was a potential witness, meaning anyone
who has any firsthand knowledge of the facts of this case,
you're not to speak to that person about this case yourself or
through any intermediaries other than your lawyer or
investigators working for your lawyer.
You're not to possess a firearm, destructive device
or other dangerous weapon or ammunition. You are to refrain
from the excessive use of alcohol, a drink here and there is
not prohibited, but just be careful, very careful, because the
excessive use of alcohol would not only be a violation of the
bond in itself but obviously can also lead to other bad
decisions that would be also violations.
You're not to use or unlawfully possess a narcotic
drug or other controlled substance unless it's lawfully
prescribed by a licensed medical practitioner. And you may be
required to submit to drug testing periodically by the Pretrial
Services Office, and Ms. Crawford will go over that with you.
As we discussed, I'm going to place you on a
locational monitoring program. I'm going to leave it to the
Pretrial Office to decide the details, including what sort of
device to place you on. It's also going to be required that
you pay all or part of the cost of the program. There is a fee
associated with the use of this technology. And if you're able
to pay or contribute, you'll be expected to do so. And the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 24 of 30
25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Pretrial Office will, you know, work with you on that. If you
are unable to pay, then that's going to be excused, but if you
have the ability to pay or contribute, you will do so.
The -- with locational monitoring, it would follow
and I think would be appropriate also to assess a curfew.
That's the best way to enforce the locational monitoring, if
you -- if there's a time every night where it's expected that
you're home. I'm going to leave that to the Pretrial Office to
set the appropriate timing based on your work schedule and
things of that sort.
The -- you are required to remain in this judicial
district, the Northern District of Georgia, unless you get
prior permission from the Pretrial Services Office or the
Court. The Northern District of Georgia is a large place, it
includes the entire Metro Atlanta area, including Dacula where
you live, and all -- many surrounding counties all the way up
to mostly speaking of the northern borders of the state, but
you'll be expected to know where you can and cannot go.
The Pretrial Office will be able to help you with
that, give you a list of counties or a map. Ms. Miller can
advise you as well. It sounds like for work purpose, you
don't -- it's rare you might need to leave. If you have the
need to leave, for work or personal, family, for example, then
you may be able to get permission to do so, but you have to ask
and get that permission in advance.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 25 of 30
26
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
You must report to the pretrial office within 72
hours if you have any contact with law enforcement personnel,
so if you're arrested for something new or even if it's less
than an arrest, you're pulled over for something, whether
you're given a ticket or not, you've just got to report that
within 72 hours to the Pretrial Services Office.
You're -- you're going to be supervised by an officer
from the Pretrial Services Department of the Court. You're
meeting with Ms. Crawford this afternoon, it will likely not be
her personally, but one of her colleagues who will supervise
you on an ongoing basis.
That person doesn't work for the prosecution or the
law enforcement, they work for the Court. So you just need to
make sure that you're cooperating with them, that you are
following their instructions and directions. They may come,
for example, to your -- to your home or business, either
announced or unannounced, and you have to be cooperative with
them at all times.
All right. So any -- any -- anything further?
Anything I missed? Or any objection to the conditions of bond
as I've read them?
MS. MILLER: No, Your Honor. May I just have one
second?
THE COURT: Um-hmm.
MS. MILLER: No questions, Judge. I think we've got
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 26 of 30
27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
it.
THE COURT: Okay. I actually -- I did overlook
the -- two very important conditions that, of course -- and
this should be -- go without saying -- but that you are
required to report for court for all proceedings including
trial or any other proceedings that your attendance is required
for.
You also are not to commit any other offenses while
on release, federal, state or local offenses.
All right. I'm going to -- I've filled this out with
my electronic signature. And I'm going to print it out or --
let me send it to Ms. Evans who can print it out.
MR. PHILLIPS: Judge, may I add one thing before you
do that?
THE COURT: Yes. Yes. I'm sorry.
MR. PHILLIPS: On behalf of the government, I --
Ms. Malloy has told me that there are different types of
location monitoring. I think I understood the Court to
indicate that by saying that the Court would leave it up to
pretrial to determine what type is used. But we would like to
request that the Court recommend or order pretrial to use the
GPS GEO location monitoring. We understand there are different
types. And Ms. Malloy has had some experience where the other
types didn't work as well, and so we're specifically requesting
that type. Thank you.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 27 of 30
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
THE COURT: All right. Well, I'm going to leave that
to Ms. Crawford, her discretion, or her office's discretion.
If there ends up being any -- a specific dispute about that,
then I can get back involved, but I'm going to -- pretrial's
best able to assess and knows the technology better than I do
and it will assess based on the facts of the case and the
situation what is warranted and what the least restrictive
means that would be necessary would be so -- and, you know,
different technologies have vastly different costs as well, so
that -- pretrial's in the best position to balance all of that,
at least in the first instance.
So I'm going to send this to Ms. Evans. Or, Bel,
what I'm doing, I'm going to save it to the shared drive. Hold
on one sec.
Okay. So it should be in the duty drive -- in the
duty folder. Do you see that?
Okay. All right. So she'll print that out and bring
that to you. You've got to sign, Mr. Fayne, and then Ms. Evans
will get you back the copies that you'll need to bring down to
the marshals or she'll send those down to the marshals and that
should be that.
So just wait a moment to sign this paperwork and get
the copies and then when we're done here, the agents will take
you down again to the marshals' lockup and that's where --
you'll be released from there.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 28 of 30
29
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
But just remember before leaving the building, you go
meet with pretrial, Ms. Crawford, on the 9th floor.
MS. MILLER: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. You've still got to sign and
all of that, but I'm going to, otherwise -- unless there is
anything else, I'm going to take my leave. Anything else?
MS. MILLER: No, Judge.
MR. PHILLIPS: Thank you, Judge.
MS. MILLER: Thank you.
THE COURT: All right. We'll be in recess. Thanks
very much.
(Whereupon, the proceedings were adjourned at 3:06
p.m.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 29 of 30
30
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
REPORTERS CERTIFICATE
I, Jana B. Colter, Official Court Reporter for the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia, with offices at Atlanta, do hereby certify:
That I reported on the Stenograph machine the taped
proceedings held in open court on May 13, 2020, in the matter
of United States of America v. Maurice Fayne, Case Number
1:20-MJ-370; that said proceedings in connection with the
hearing were reduced to typewritten form by me; and that the
foregoing transcript (29 Pages) is a true and accurate record
of the proceedings.
This the 14th day of December, 2020.
_______________________________
/s/ Jana B. Colter, FAPR, RMR, CRR, CRC
Official Court Reporter
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00228-MHC-JKL Document 144 Filed 01/26/21 Page 30 of 30File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.gand.278524.144.0.pdf
- Size
- 368,879 bytes
- SHA-256
- 16a62069a39dea2c5d3aa389ea303784cc903001441d3b156d54bd4d2d884a0f
- Original
- PACER (login required)