Indictment — United States v. Tracy D. Wade (Dkt. 156, S.D. Fla. No. 0:23-cr-60173)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 0:23-cr-60173-KMW · Doc. 156 · 2024-09-24 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Page 1 of 6 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-WILLIAMS 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                                    
 
           Plaintiff,                                                                         
v. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and  
TRACY D. WADE,  
           
 Defendant, 
_____________________________/ 
 
DEFENDANT TRACY WADE’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSTION TO THE 
GOVERNMENT’S NOTICE OF INTENT TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE OF 
OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS, OR ACTS PURSUANT TO FED. R. EVID. 404(b)(2) 
 
 
Defendant Tracy Wade, through counsel, files his response in opposition to the 
Government’s Notice of Intent to Introduce Evidence of Oher Crimes, Wrongs or Acts 
pursuant to Federal R. Evid. 404(b)(2) (DE 135).   In support thereof, Mr. Wade states:  
Background 
Mr. Wade and his wife, Caroly Wade, are charged by way of superseding 
indictment with several offenses related to fraudulently acquiring Paycheck Protection 
Program (PPP) loans from the Small Business Administration (SBA). In count 1, Mr. 
Wade and Ms. Wade are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of 
18 U.S.C.§ 1349 from May 2021 to August 2021.  Count 1 also names Haydee Rivero f/k/a 
Hayde Granados as an uncharged coconspirator who created and prepared false 
documents to be submitted with PPP loan applications.  
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 156   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2024   Page 1 of 5

Page 2 of 6 
 
The superseding indictment also charges Mr. Wade and Ms. Wade with 
substantive wire fraud counts for allegedly obtaining PPP loans by means of fraudulent 
representation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; conspiracy to make false statements to 
the SBA, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §371; and substantive counts of making false 
statements to the SBA in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 645(a).  Haydee Rivero f/k/a Hayde 
Granados is also named as a co-conspirator in the conspiracy to make false statements 
to the SBA count.  
The government seeks to introduce evidence that Mr. Wade applied for two 
Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL) for his funeral home. Neither of these loans are 
referenced in the superseding indictment.  
The government alleges that in an EIDL submitted on April 10, 2020, Mr. Wade 
represented that the funeral home’s gross revenue for the prior 12 months was 
$465,000,000 and the cost of goods sold was $175,000,000. However, when questioned by 
an SBA loan officer, Mr. Wade provided a full copy of his business tax return which 
reflected a correct gross revenue amount of $345,359 and a correct cost of goods amount 
of $165,339.  As a result, Mr. Wade received a loan in the amount of $80,100 loan. The 
government does not allege that Mr. Wade was not entitled to receive the $80,100 EIDL 
loan from SBA. 
In the second EIDL loan submitted on May 7, 2020, Mr. Wade allegedly 
represented that the funeral home’s gross revenue for the prior 12 months was 
$350,000,000.  After the SBA identified the application was duplicative, no further action 
was taken by the SBA.  
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 156   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2024   Page 2 of 5

Page 3 of 6 
 
The government seeks to introduce evidence of the EIDL loan applications under 
Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2). Mr. Wade seeks to exclude evidence of the EIDL applications and 
submits that the evidence of the EIDL loan applications is not probative of any issue 
other than Mr. Wade’s character, which is prohibited under Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(1). 
Additionally, Mr. Wade submits that the evidence of the EIDL applications is excludable 
under Fed. R. Evid 403 because the probative value of the evidence substantially 
outweighed by unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues.  
Argument and Memorandum of Law  
Under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1), evidence of a person’s character is not admissible 
to prove that a person acted in accordance with that character on a particular occasion. 
Under Fed. R. Evid 403, the Court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value 
is substantially outweighed by a danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues or 
misleading the jury.  Because the evidence of the EIDL loans is inadmissible under Rule 
404(b)(1) and excludable under Rule 403, the Court should preclude the government from 
introducing the evidence at trial.  
The inflated gross revenue amounts that were represented in the EIDL 
applications most likely resulted from a mistake by Mr. Wade or caused by the software 
guiding the online application process. When asked by an SBA loan officer Mr. Wade 
produced a tax return reflecting the true gross income amount and the true cost of goods 
amount. In addition, Mr. Wade provided SBA with a duly executed IRS Form 4506-T 
Request for Transcript of Tax Return enabling SBA to obtain tax records for the 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 156   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2024   Page 3 of 5

Page 4 of 6 
 
applicant directly from the IRS. It does not stand to reason that Mr. Wade would provide 
SBA with an accurate tax return if his intent to was to deceive the SBA.  
Additionally, as the government is aware, the theory of defense is that Haydee 
Rivero f/k/a Haydee Rivero included fraudulent information on the PPP loan application 
without the knowledge of Mr. and Ms. Wade. The PPP loan application process and the 
EIDL application process are different.  Mr. Wade’s applying for an EIDL does not 
suggest that Mr. Wade was familiar with the PPP loan application process.  See United 
States v. Chaveaz, 204 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2000) (error to admit evidence of similar 
conduct that bore no relationship to defendant’s defense).    
 
Finally, the superseding indictment does not contain any allegations of 
wrongdoing with respect to the EIDL loans.   The jury is likely to be confused if the 
government is allowed to introduce evidence that Mr. Wade applied for an EIDL loan 
and argue to the jury that he intentionally attempted to deceive the SBA in the EIDL 
application process, when the government’s entire case against the Wades relates to Mr. 
and Mrs. Wade’s conduct in the PPP loan application process.  
Conclusion  
Based on the foregoing facts, arguments and citations to authorities, Mr. Wade 
respectfully requests that the Court exclude the evidence that the government seeks to 
admit pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2) 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 156   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2024   Page 4 of 5

Page 5 of 6 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading was 
electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court via CM/ECF. I also certify that the 
foregoing pleading was served electronically on this date on all counsel of record via 
Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF on September 24, 2024.  
 
Respectfully Submitted, 
 
/s/ Daryl E. Wilcox.___ 
Daryl E. Wilcox, Esquire  
Florida Bar No.838845  
5201 S.W. 18th Street 
Plantation, Florida 33317 
Phone: (954) 303-1457 
darylewilcox06@gmail.com  
 
 
/s/ Johnny L. McCray 
 
Johnny L. McCray, Jr., Esq. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Florida Bar Number 342319 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Law Office of Johnny L. McCray, Jr., P.A. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
400 East Atlantic Boulevard 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pompano Beach, FL 33060 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Phone: (954) 781-3662  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
mccrayjlaw@gmail.com 
 
                           
 
Attorneys for the Defendants                                                 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cc: Carolyn D. Wade 
      Tracy D. Wade 
  
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 156   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2024   Page 5 of 5

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.156.0.pdf

Size

198,118 bytes

SHA-256

5716ec13f9ce2d5a14b56ee9e33bc0b9f5b2ecf558e7973f5e6fe40784544644

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.156.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)