Court filing
Second Motion to Continue Trial, Pre-Trial — United States v. Sutton et al. (Dkt. 179, S.D. W. Va.)
Summary
Defendant's Second Motion to Continue Trial, Pre-Trial Deadlines, filed May 6, 2025, by counsel Connor Robertson for Kisha Sutton, Case No. 2:24-CR-000192-01, in the Southern District of West Virginia, Charleston. It asks for an additional 90 days because counsel recently discovered new and potentially exculpatory/favorable information. It states that the Court granted an earlier request for a continuance, setting a new Trial date for June 9, 2025 and a Pre-Trial Motions deadline of May 6, 2025. It states that counsel then began investigating whether Womply qualified as a Financial Institution as defined by federal law, and that counsel has reached out to banking experts.
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
Filed May 6, 2025 in United States v. Sutton et al.; one of 235 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2025-05-06 |
Cite this document
“Second Motion to Continue Trial, Pre-Trial — United States v. Sutton et al. (Dkt. 179, S.D. W. Va.).”
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, No. 2:24-cr-00192, Doc. 179, filed 2025-05-06. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-kisha-sutton-wvsd-240497/2025-05-06-gov-uscourts-wvsd-240497-179-0-doc-179/
, SHA-256 a9c5030ca448057d37da00b9cae7f7529b00df39dee299891a15da4322c32247.Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, V. CASE NO.: 2:24-CR-000192-01 KISHA SUTTON, DEFENDANT. DEFENDANT’S SECOND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES Now comes the Defendant, Kisha Sutton, by and through counsel, Connor Robertson, and respectfully requests this Court to Continue the Trial and associated Pre-Trial Deadlines for an additional 90 days in order to allow undersigned counsel to properly prepare as undersigned counsel recently discovered new and potentially exculpatory/favorable information relating to the parties/participants in this case. In support thereof, the Defendant states as follows: 1. Defendant self-reported to the Southern District of West Virginia traveling from New York on or aboutFebruary20,2025.Undersignedcounselwasappointedat that time. 2. Afterarraignment,theUnitedStatesserveddiscoveryupontheDefendant,through undersigned counsel, which was received on or about Tuesday, March 11, 2025. 3. Defendant’s deadline for pre-trial motions was previously set by the Court on Thursday, March 13, 2013, two days after discovery was received. Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 829 4. Undersignedcounselrequestedadditionaltime,viaaMotiontoContinue,inorder to have time to review the discovery, meet with the Government, meet with the client and properly prepare for trial. 5. TheCourtgrantedtherequestforacontinuanceonoraboutApril2,2025setting a new Trial date for June 9, 2025 and Pre-Trial Motions deadline of May 6, 2025. 6. Since that time, undersigned counsel has diligently reviewed the voluminous discovery turned over by the Government in this case and conferenced with his clientregardingthesame.Additionally,undersignedcounselhasconferredwiththe Government regarding key pieces of evidence in order to fully understand the case. 7. After reviewing said evidence, the government’s theory of thecasebecamemore evident than it was than simply reviewing the Indictment which was silent as to what companies were involved in the PPP loan process and how their actions fit into the alleged scheme. For example, the Indictment simply listed Financial Institution 1 as the victim of the alleged Bank Fraud scheme, but undersigned counsel didn’t find out who Financial Institution 1 was until a full and detailed review of the voluminous discovery. 8. After having the opportunity to understand the alleged scheme more specifically and what financial institutions and other companies were involved, undersigned counsel began to investigate the financial institutions and third party administrators roleinthePPPloanprocessinordertodeterminewhetherornot their involvement in the alleged scheme caused, contributed to, or in any way facilitated the alleged fraudulent activity. Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 830 9. As it stands, and is now more fullyunderstood,theallegationsagainstMs.Sutton allegedthatsheusedafinancialplatformcalled,Womply,toapplyforPPPloanson behalf of heracquaintances.Womplyisafinancialtechnologycompanythatacted as a third-party administrator to process PPP loan applications and connect the applicationswithprivatelenderswhowouldfundthePPPloans.Womply,basedon information and belief, is not a financial institution asdefinedbyfederallaw.Itis understood now that Womply would auto-populate many of the application questions with answers leaving the user to simply hit send on the application without the user having to input specific information. Upon submission of the application on the Womplyplatform,Womplywouldthenconnectwiththelender tofundtheloanifapproved.Oneoftheselendersisacompanycalled“Harvest”.It isbelievedthatHarvestisoneoftheFinancialInstitutionsinvolvedinthiscasethat meets the definition under Federal Law. 10.On Thursday,May1,2025,undersignedcounselbeganinvestigatingwhatWomply was to determineifitqualifiedasaFinancialInstitutionasdefinedbyfederallaw. In doing so, undersigned counsel uncovered a treasure trove of information indicating that the United StatesGovernment,morespecificallytheSmallBusiness Administration,foundthatWomplyfacilitatedfraudduringtheCovid-19pandemic and has now been removed from use by theSBAandcriminalinvestigationsinto Womplycontinue.Additionally,thereportsdetailhowlenderslikeHarvestfailedto even review the PPP Loan applications processed by Womply opting to fund the loans withoutanyunderwriting.Thereportissuedfromaselectsubcommitteeon the coronavirus crisis detailed how companies like Womply generated billions of Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 831 dollars in profits in processing loans and how lenders likeHarvestfailedtoeven review the loan applications. It is hard to imagine, in a bank fraud prosecution, where “materiality” of falseorfraudulentstatementsisatissue,thatalenderwas victimized when they failed to even review the application andinsteadactedasa rubberstamp.ItisalsodifficulttounderstandhoworwhyMs.Suttonwouldhave to pay restitutionorforfeituretoacompanylike“Harvest”theallegedlenderand victim, when they made billions from the government and were fully secured in funding the loans. See New Select Subcommittee Report Reveals How Fintech Companies Facilitated Fraud in the Paycheck Protection Program | House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis. 11.ThebasisforthisMotiontoContinueistoallowundersignedcounseltofigureout how all of this information fits into thedefenseofMs.Sutton’scase.Undersigned counsel hasreachedouttobankingexpertstoinquireifconsultingand/orexpert witness testimony might be necessary. 12.Given this late uncovering of this information in relationtoundersignedPre-Trial Motion’sdeadline,undersignedcounselaskstheCourtformoretimetoinvestigate anddeterminehowthisinformationfitsintothedefenseofthiscaseandwhatnext steps might be necessary. Wherefore,theDefendantrespectfullyrequeststhisCourttoContinuetheTrialand Pre-Trial Deadlines and for other such relief as is necessary and proper. Respectfully submitted, By Counsel Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 832 S:// Connor D. Robertson Connor Robertson (11460) ROBERTSON LAW PLLC 2939 Virginia Avenue, Suite 2010 Hurricane, WV 25526 (304) 557-1601 cdr@croblaw.com Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 833 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, V. CASE NO.: 2:24-CR-000192-01 KISHA SUTTON, DEFENDANT. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Connor Robertson, certify that on the 6th day of May, 2025, a copy of the foregoing motion was served on theUnitedStatesbyECF,toJonathanStorage,Assistant United States Attorney to the following: Jonathan Storage Assistant United States Attorney Jonathan.Storage@usdoj.gov S:// Connor D. Robertson Connor Robertson (11460) ROBERTSON LAW PLLC 2939 Virginia Avenue, Suite 2010 Hurricane, WV 25526 (304) 557-1601 CDR@CROBLAW.COM Case 2:24-cr-00192 Document 179 Filed 05/06/25 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 834
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.wvsd.240497.179.0.pdf
- Size
- 91,367 bytes
- SHA-256
- a9c5030ca448057d37da00b9cae7f7529b00df39dee299891a15da4322c32247
- Original
- PACER (login required)