Indictment — United States v. Tracy D. Wade (Dkt. 160, 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. 160 · 2024-09-25 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-KMW(s) (GRAHAM)  
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
vs. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and 
TRACY D. WADE, 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________________________/ 
 
UNITED STATES’ PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS  
AND VERDICT FORM 
 
Pursuant to the Court’s Criminal Trial Scheduling Order, entered August 12, 2024 
(DE 125), the United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully 
submits the following jury instructions and verdict form. 
The United States respectfully requests that the Court allow the United States to 
propose such additional instructions as become appropriate based upon the testimony and 
evidence at trial, and that the parties be informed prior to closing arguments which 
instructions the Court will give to the jury. 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
    
MARKENZY LAPOINTE 
  
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
 
By: /s/ David A. Snider  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
David A. Snider 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Court ID No. A5502260 
500 E. Broward Blvd 
Fort Lauderdale, FL  33394 
Tel: (954) 660-5696 
Fax: (954) 356-7336 
Email: david.snider@usdoj.gov
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 1 of 38

1 
P1 
Preliminary Instructions – Criminal Cases 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-KMW(s) (GRAHAM) 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
vs. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and 
TRACY D. WADE, 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________________________/ 
 
Members of the Jury: 
Now that you have been sworn, I need to explain some basic principles about 
a criminal trial and your duty as jurors.  These are preliminary instructions. At the 
end of the trial I will give you more detailed instructions. 
Duty of jury: 
It will be your duty to decide what happened so you can determine whether 
the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crime charged in the indictment.  At the 
end of the trial, I will explain the law that you must follow to reach your verdict.  
You must follow the law as I explain it to you even if you do not agree with the law. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 2 of 38

2 
What is evidence: 
You must decide the case solely on the evidence presented here in the 
courtroom.  Evidence can come in many forms.  It can be testimony about what 
someone saw or heard or smelled.  It can be an exhibit admitted into evidence. It can 
be someone’s opinion.  Some evidence proves a fact indirectly, such as a witness 
who saw wet grass outside and people walking into the courthouse carrying wet 
umbrellas.  Indirect evidence, sometimes called circumstantial evidence, is simply a 
chain of circumstances that proves a fact.  As far as the law is concerned, it makes 
no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect.  You may choose to believe or 
disbelieve either kind and should give every piece of evidence whatever weight you 
think it deserves. 
What is not evidence: 
Certain things are not evidence and must not be considered.  I will list them 
for you now: 
• Statements and arguments of the lawyers.  In their opening statements 
and closing arguments, the lawyers will discuss the case, but their 
remarks are not evidence; 
• Questions and objections of the lawyers.  The lawyers’ questions are 
not evidence.  Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence.  You should 
not think that something is true just because a lawyer’s question 
suggests that it is.  For instance, if a lawyer asks a witness, “you saw 
the defendant hit his sister, didn’t you?” – that question is no evidence 
whatsoever of what the witness saw or what the defendant did, unless 
the witness agrees with it. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 3 of 38

3 
There are rules of evidence that control what can be received into evidence.  
When a lawyer asks a question or offers an exhibit and a lawyer on the other side 
thinks that it is not permitted by the rules of evidence, that lawyer may object.  If I 
overrule the objection, then the question may be answered, or the exhibit received.  
If I sustain the objection, then the question cannot be answered, and the exhibit 
cannot be received.  Whenever I sustain an objection to a question, you must ignore 
the question and not try to guess what the answer would have been. 
Sometimes I may order that evidence be stricken and that you disregard or 
ignore the evidence.  That means that when you are deciding the case, you must not 
consider that evidence. 
Some evidence is admitted only for a limited purpose.  When I instruct you 
that an item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you must consider 
it only for that limited purpose and no other. 
Credibility of witnesses: 
In reaching your verdict, you may have to decide what testimony to believe 
and what testimony not to believe.  You may believe everything a witness says, or 
part of it, or none of it. In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take 
into account: 
• The opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the 
things testified to; 
• The witness’s memory; 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 4 of 38

4 
• The witness’s manner while testifying; 
• The witness’s interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or 
prejudice; 
• Whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony; 
• The reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the 
evidence; and 
• Any other factors that bear on believability. 
I will give you additional guidelines for determining credibility of witnesses 
at the end of the case. 
Rules for criminal cases: 
As you know, this is a criminal case.  There are three basic rules about a 
criminal case that you must keep in mind. 
First, the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.  The indictment 
against the defendant brought by the government is only an accusation, nothing 
more.  It is not proof of guilt or anything else.  The defendant therefore starts out 
with a clean slate. 
Second, the burden of proof is on the government until the very end of the 
case.  The defendant has no burden to prove her innocence or to present any 
evidence, or to testify.  Since the defendant has the right to remain silent and may 
choose whether to testify, you cannot legally put any weight on a defendant’s choice 
not to testify.  It is not evidence. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 5 of 38

5 
Third, the government must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable 
doubt.  I will give you further instructions on this point later, but bear in mind that 
the level of proof required is high. 
Conduct of the jury: 
Our law requires jurors to follow certain instructions regarding their personal 
conduct in order to help assure a just and fair trial.  I will now give you those 
instructions: 
1. Do not talk, either among yourselves or with anyone else, about 
anything related to the case.  You may tell the people with whom you 
live and your employer that you are a juror and give them information 
about when you will be required to be in court, but you may not discuss 
with them or anyone else anything related to the case. 
2. Do not, at any time during the trial, request, accept, agree to accept, 
or discuss with any person, any type of payment or benefit in return for 
supplying any information about the trial. 
3. You must promptly tell me about any incident you know of involving 
an attempt by any person to improperly influence you or any member 
of the jury. 
4. Do not visit or view the premises or place where the charged crime 
was allegedly committed, or any other premises or place involved in 
the case. And you must not use Internet maps or Google Earth or any 
other program or device to search for a view of any location discussed 
in the testimony. 
5. Do not read, watch, or listen to any accounts or discussions related 
to the case which may be reported by newspapers, television, radio, the 
Internet, or any other news media. 
6. Do not attempt to research any fact, issue, or law related to this case, 
whether by discussions with others, by library or Internet research, or 
by any other means or source. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 6 of 38

6 
In this age of instant electronic communication and research, I want to 
emphasize that in addition to not talking face to face with anyone about the case, 
you must not communicate with anyone about the case by any other means, 
including by telephone, text messages, email, Internet chat, chat rooms, blogs, or 
social-networking websites and apps such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, 
YouTube, or Twitter.  You may not use any similar technology of social media, even 
if I have not specifically mentioned it here.  
You must not provide any information about the case to anyone by any means 
whatsoever, and that includes posting information about the case, or what you are 
doing in the case, on any device or Internet site, including blogs, chat rooms, social 
websites, or any other means. 
You also must not use Google or otherwise search for any information about 
the case, or the law that applies to the case, or the people involved in the case, 
including the defendant, the witnesses, the lawyers, or the judge. It is important that 
you understand why these rules exist and why they are so important: 
Our law does not permit jurors to talk with anyone else about the case, or to 
permit anyone to talk to them about the case, because only jurors are authorized to 
render a verdict. Only you have been found to be fair and only you have promised 
to be fair – no one else is so qualified. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 7 of 38

7 
Our law also does not permit jurors to talk among themselves about the case 
until the court tells them to begin deliberations, because premature discussions can 
lead to a premature final decision. 
Our law also does not permit you to visit a place discussed in the testimony. 
First, you can’t be sure that the place is in the same condition as it was on the day in 
question. Second, even if it were in the same condition, once you go to a place 
discussed in the testimony to evaluate the evidence in light of what you see, you 
become a witness, not a juror. As a witness, you may now have a mistaken view of 
the scene that neither party may have a chance to correct. That is not fair. 
Finally, our law requires that you not read or listen to any news accounts of 
the case, and that you not attempt to research any fact, issue, or law related to the 
case.  Your decision must be based solely on the testimony and other evidence 
presented in this courtroom.  Also, the law often uses words and phrases in special 
ways, so it’s important that any definitions you hear come only from me, and not 
from any other source.  It wouldn’t be fair to the parties for you to base your decision 
on some reporter’s view or opinion, or upon other information you acquire outside 
the courtroom. 
These rules are designed to help guarantee a fair trial, and our law accordingly 
sets forth serious consequences if the rules are not followed.  I trust that you 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 8 of 38

8 
understand and appreciate the importance of following these rules, and in accord 
with your oath and promise, I know you will do so. 
Taking notes: 
Moving on now, if you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what 
witnesses said.  If you do take notes, please keep them to yourself until you and your 
fellow jurors go to the jury room to decide the case.  Do not let note-taking distract 
you so that you do not hear other answers by witnesses.  When you leave the 
courtroom, your notes should be left in the jury room. Whether or not you take notes, 
you should rely on your own memory of what was said.  Notes are to assist your 
memory only.  They are not entitled to any greater weight than your memory or 
impression about the testimony. 
Course of the trial: 
The trial will now begin.  First, the government will make an opening 
statement, which is simply an outline to help you understand the evidence as it comes 
in.  Next, the defendant’s attorney may, but does not have to, make an opening 
statement.  Opening statements are neither evidence nor argument. 
The government will then present its witnesses, and counsel for the defendant 
may cross-examine them.  Following the government’s case, the defendants may, if 
they wish, present witnesses whom the government may cross-examine.  After all 
the evidence is in, the attorneys will present their closing arguments to summarize 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 9 of 38

9 
and interpret the evidence for you, and I will instruct you on the law.  After that, you 
will go to the jury room to decide your verdict. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 10 of 38

10 
B1 
Face Page - Introduction 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-KMW(s) (GRAHAM) 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
vs. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and 
TRACY D. WADE, 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________________________/ 
 
COURT’S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY 
 
Members of the Jury: 
It’s my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in deciding 
this case.  After I’ve completed these instructions, you will go to the jury room and 
begin your discussions – what we call your deliberations. 
You must decide whether the Government has proved the specific facts 
necessary to find the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 11 of 38

11 
B2.2 
The Duty to Follow Instructions and the Presumption Of Innocence 
When a Defendant Does Not Testify 
 
Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented during the trial. 
You must not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against 
the Defendant or the Government. 
You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you do not agree with the 
law – and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single 
out or disregard any of the Court's instructions on the law. 
The indictment or formal charge against a Defendant isn’t evidence of guilt. 
The law presumes every Defendant is innocent. The Defendant does not have to 
prove her innocence or produce any evidence at all. A Defendant does not have to 
testify, and if the Defendant chose not to testify, you cannot consider that in any way 
while making your decision. The Government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable 
doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the Defendant not guilty. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 12 of 38

12 
B3 
Definition of “Reasonable Doubt” 
 
The Government's burden of proof is heavy, but it doesn’t have to prove a 
Defendant's guilt beyond all possible doubt.  The Government's proof only has to 
exclude any “reasonable doubt” concerning the Defendant's guilt. 
A “reasonable doubt” is a real doubt, based on your reason and common sense 
after you’ve carefully and impartially considered all the evidence in the case. 
“Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is proof so convincing that you would be 
willing to rely and act on it without hesitation in the most important of your own 
affairs.  If you are convinced that the Defendant has been proved guilty beyond a 
reasonable doubt, say so.  If you are not convinced, say so. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 13 of 38

13 
B4 
Consideration of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence; 
Argument of Counsel; Comments by the Court 
 
As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted in 
the case.  Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted.  
But, anything the lawyers say is not evidence and isn’t binding on you. 
You shouldn’t assume from anything I’ve said that I have any opinion about 
any factual issue in this case.  Except for my instructions to you on the law, you 
should disregard anything I may have said during the trial in arriving at your own 
decision about the facts. 
Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is what matters. 
In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to 
make deductions and reach conclusions.  You shouldn’t be concerned about whether 
the evidence is direct or circumstantial. 
“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she has 
actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness. 
“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances that 
tend to prove or disprove a fact.  There’s no legal difference in the weight you may 
give to either direct or circumstantial evidence. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 14 of 38

14 
B5 
Credibility of Witnesses 
 
When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don’t mean that you must 
accept all the evidence as true or accurate.  You should decide whether you believe 
what each witness had to say, and how important that testimony was.  In making that 
decision you may believe or disbelieve any witness, in whole or in part.  The number 
of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point doesn’t necessarily matter. 
To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself a 
few questions: 
• Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth? 
 
• Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth? 
 
• Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the case? 
 
• Did the witness seem to have a good memory? 
 
• Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately 
observe the things he or she testified about? 
 
• Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and 
answer them directly? 
 
• Did the witness's testimony differ from other testimony or other 
evidence? 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 15 of 38

15 
Persons Not on Trial 
In addition, some of the people who may have been involved in these events 
are not on trial.  This does not matter.  There is no requirement that all participants 
of a scheme to defraud be charged and prosecuted in one proceeding. 
You may not draw any inference, favorable or unfavorable, towards the 
Government or the Defendant on trial from the fact that any person in addition to the 
Defendant is not on trial here.  You may also not speculate as to the reasons why 
other persons are not on trial. 
ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS 
 
See United States v. Rabuffo, et al., Case No. 14-20008-CR-Moore, Transcript (DE 542) at 62 (In 
addition, some of the people who may have been involved in these events are not on trial. This 
doesn't matter. There is no requirement that all members of a conspiracy or all codefendants be 
charged and prosecuted in one proceeding. You may not draw any inference, favorable or 
unfavorable, towards the government or the defendant on trial from the fact that any person in 
addition to the defendants is not on trial here. You may also not speculate as to the reasons why 
other persons are not on trial.); United States v. Martin, Case No. 13-20457-CR-Cohn, Jury 
Instructions (DE 144) at 7 (same). 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 16 of 38

16 
B8 
Introduction to Offense Instructions 
 
The superseding indictment charges 10 separate crimes, called “counts,” 
against the Defendants. Each count has a number. You’ll be given a copy of the 
superseding indictment to refer to during your deliberations. 
Count 1 charges that the Defendants knowingly and willfully conspired to 
commit wire fraud, in violation in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349.  
Defendants are not charged in Count 1 with committing a substantive offense – they 
are charged with conspiring to commit that offense.  I will also give you specific 
instructions on that conspiracy offense. 
Counts 2-3 charge that the Defendants committed what are called “substantive 
offenses,” specifically, that Defendants committed wire fraud, in violation of Title 
18, United States Code, Section 1343.  Count 2 charges only Defendant Tracy Wade 
with this offense.  Count 3 charges both Defendants with this offense.  I will explain 
the law governing this offense in a moment. 
Count 4 charges that the Defendants knowingly and willfully conspired to 
make false statements to the Small Business Administration, in violation of Title 18, 
United States Code, Section 371.  Defendants are not charged in Count 4 with 
committing a substantive offense – they are charged with conspiring to commit that 
offense.  I will also give you specific instructions on this conspiracy offense. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 17 of 38

17 
Counts 5-10 charge that the Defendants made false statements to the Small 
Business Administration, in violation of Title 15, United States Code, Section 
645(a).  Defendant Carolyn Wade is charged with this offense in Counts 5, 8, and 9.  
Defendant Tracy Wade is charged with this offense in Counts 6, 7, and 10.  I will 
also explain the law governing this offense. 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 18 of 38

18 
O54 
Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud 
18 U.S.C. § 1349 
 
It’s a Federal crime to knowingly and willfully conspire or agree with 
someone to do something that, if actually carried out, would result in the crime of 
mail fraud. 
A “conspiracy” is an agreement by two or more persons to commit an 
unlawful act. In other words, it is a kind of partnership for criminal purposes. Every 
member of the conspiracy becomes the agent or partner of every other member. 
The Government does not have to prove that all the people named in the 
indictment were members of the plan, or that those who were members made any 
kind of formal agreement. The heart of a conspiracy is the making of the unlawful 
plan itself, so the Government does not have to prove that the conspirators succeeded 
in carrying out the plan. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this conspiracy offense only if all the 
following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) two or more persons, in some way or manner, agreed to try to 
accomplish a common and unlawful plan to commit wire fraud, as 
charged in the superseding indictment; and 
 
(2) the Defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully 
joined in it; 
 
A person may be a conspirator even without knowing all the details of the 
unlawful plan or the names and identities all of the other alleged conspirators. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 19 of 38

19 
If the Defendant played only a minor part in the plan but had a general 
understanding of the unlawful purpose of the plan – and willfully joined in the plan 
on at least one occasion – that’s sufficient for you to find the Defendant guilty. 
But simply being present at the scene of an event or merely associating with 
certain people and discussing common goals and interests doesn’t establish proof of 
a conspiracy. Also, a person who doesn’t know about a conspiracy but happens to 
act in a way that advances some purpose of one doesn’t automatically become a 
conspirator. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 20 of 38

1 
 
O51 
Wire Fraud 
18 U.S.C. § 1343 
It’s a federal crime to use interstate wire, radio, or television communications 
to carry out a scheme to defraud someone else. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following facts 
are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) 
the Defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to 
defraud someone by using false or fraudulent pretenses, 
representations, or promises; 
(2) 
the false pretenses, representations, or promises were about a 
material fact; 
(3) 
the Defendant acted with the intent to defraud; and 
(4) 
the Defendant transmitted or caused to be transmitted by wire 
some communication in interstate commerce to help carry out the 
scheme to defraud. 
A “scheme to defraud” means any plan or course of action intended to deceive 
or cheat someone out of money or property by using false or fraudulent pretenses, 
representations, or promises. 
A statement or representation is “false” or “fraudulent” if it is about a material 
fact that the speaker knows is untrue or makes with reckless indifference to the truth, 
and makes with the intent to defraud.  A statement or representation may be “false” 
or “fraudulent” when it is a half-truth, or effectively conceals a material fact, and is 
made with the intent to defraud. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 21 of 38

2 
A “material fact” is an important fact that a reasonable person would use to 
decide whether to do or not do something.  A fact is “material” if it has the capacity 
or natural tendency to influence a person’s decision.  It doesn’t matter whether the 
decision-maker actually relied on the statement or knew or should have known that 
the statement was false. 
To act with “intent to defraud” means to act knowingly and with the specific 
intent to use false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises to cause loss 
or injury.  Proving intent to deceive alone, without the intent to cause loss or injury, 
is not sufficient to prove intent to defraud. 
The Government does not have to prove all the details alleged in the 
indictment about the precise nature and purpose of the scheme.  It also doesn’t have 
to prove that the material transmitted by interstate wire was itself false or fraudulent; 
or that using the wire was intended as the specific or exclusive means of carrying 
out the alleged fraud; or that the Defendant personally made the transmission over 
the wire.  And it doesn’t have to prove that the alleged scheme actually succeeded 
in defrauding anyone. 
To “use” interstate wire communications is to act so that something would 
normally be sent through wire, radio, or television communications in the normal 
course of business. 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 22 of 38

3 
Each separate use of the interstate wire communications as part of the scheme 
to defraud is a separate crime. 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 23 of 38

4 
O13.1 
General Conspiracy Charge 
18 U.S.C. § 371 
It’s a separate Federal crime for anyone to conspire or agree with someone 
else to do something that would be another Federal crime if it was actually carried 
out. 
A “conspiracy” is an agreement by two or more people to commit an unlawful 
act. In other words, it is a kind of “partnership” for criminal purposes. Every member 
of a conspiracy becomes the agent or partner of every other member. 
The Government does not have to prove that all the people named in the 
indictment were members of the plan, or that those who were members made any 
kind of formal agreement. 
The Government does not have to prove that the members planned together 
all the details of the plan or the “overt acts” that the indictment charges would be 
carried out in an effort to commit the intended crime. 
The heart of a conspiracy is the making of the unlawful plan itself followed 
by the commission of any overt act. The Government does not have to prove that the 
conspirators succeeded in carrying out the plan. 
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following facts 
are proved beyond a reasonable doubt: 
(1) two or more persons in some way agreed to try to accomplish a 
shared and unlawful plan; 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 24 of 38

5 
(2) the Defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully 
joined in it; 
(3) during the conspiracy, one of the conspirators knowingly engaged 
in at least one overt act as described in the indictment; and 
(4) the overt act was committed at or about the time alleged and with 
the purpose of carrying out or accomplishing some object of the 
conspiracy. 
An “overt act” is any transaction or event, even one that may be entirely 
innocent when viewed alone, that a conspirator commits to accomplish some object 
of the conspiracy 
A person may be a conspirator without knowing all the details of the unlawful 
plan or the names and identities of all the other alleged conspirators. 
If the Defendant played only a minor part in the plan but had a general 
understanding of the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully joined in the plan on 
at least one occasion, that’s sufficient for you to find the Defendant guilty. 
But simply being present at the scene of an event or merely associating with 
certain people and discussing common goals and interests doesn’t establish proof of 
a conspiracy. A person who doesn’t know about a conspiracy but happens to act in 
a way that advances some purpose of one doesn’t automatically become a 
conspirator. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 25 of 38

6 
False Statements to the SBA1 
15 U.S.C. § 645(a) 
It is a Federal crime to knowingly make any false statement for the purpose 
of obtaining a loan from the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) or for the 
purpose of influencing the action of the SBA in any way.  The Defendant can be 
found guilty of this crime only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a 
reasonable doubt: 
(1) 
the Defendant knowingly made any false statement; and 
(2) 
the false statement was for the purpose of obtaining for herself 
or for any applicant any loan or for the purpose of influencing in 
any way the action of the SBA. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1 See United States v. Alexandra Acosta, Case No. 23-CR-60170-RNS (S.D. Fla.) (D.E. 68 at pp. 
12). 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 26 of 38

7 
B9.2 
On or About a Particular Date; Knowingly 
 
You’ll see that the indictment charges that a crime was committed “on or 
about” a certain date.  The Government doesn’t have to prove that the crime occurred 
on an exact date.  The Government only has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 
the crime was committed on a date reasonably close to the date alleged. 
The word “knowingly” means that an act was done voluntarily and 
intentionally and not because of a mistake or by accident. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 27 of 38

8 
B10.4 
Caution: Punishment 
(Multiple Defendants, Multiple Counts) 
Each count of the indictment charges a separate crime against one or more of 
the Defendants. You must consider each crime and the evidence relating to it 
separately. And you must consider the case of each Defendant separately and 
individually. If you find a Defendant guilty or not guilty of one crime, that must not 
affect your verdict for any other crime or any other Defendant.  
I caution you that each Defendant is on trial only for the specific crimes 
charged in the indictment. You’re here to determine from the evidence in this case 
whether each Defendant is guilty or not guilty of those specific crimes.  
You must never consider punishment in any way to decide whether a 
Defendant is guilty or not guilty. If you find a Defendant guilty, the punishment is 
for the Judge alone to decide later.  
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 28 of 38

Summaries and Summary Testimony2 
 
There has been summary testimony from witnesses at this trial and the 
Court permitted this testimony in order to aid you in considering the evidence. 
Therefore, you are to give no greater consideration to summary testimony than 
you would give to the evidence upon which that testimony is based.  
It is for you to decide whether the summary testimony or chart offered by 
a witness correctly presented the information contained in the documents on 
which they were based, and what weight to give such evidence. 
 
 
2 United States v. Richardson, 233 F.3d 1285, 1293-94 (11th Cir. 2000).  
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 29 of 38

2 
B11 
Duty to Deliberate 
 
Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous – in other 
words, you must all agree.  Your deliberations are secret, and you’ll never have 
to explain your verdict to anyone. 
Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully 
considering the evidence with the other jurors.  So, you must discuss the case 
with one another and try to reach an agreement.  While you’re discussing the 
case, don’t hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if 
you become convinced that you were wrong.  But don’t give up your honest 
beliefs just because others think differently or because you simply want to get 
the case over with. 
Remember that, in a very real way, you’re judges – judges of the facts. 
Your only interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case. 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 30 of 38

3 
S5 
Note-taking 
 
You’ve been permitted to take notes during the trial. Most of you – 
perhaps all of you – have taken advantage of that opportunity. 
You must use your notes only as a memory aid during deliberations.  You 
must not give your notes priority over your independent recollection of the 
evidence.  And you must not allow yourself to be unduly influenced by the notes 
of other jurors. 
I emphasize that notes are not entitled to any greater weight than your 
memories or impressions about the testimony. 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 31 of 38

4 
S7 
Aiding and Abetting; Agency 
18 U.S.C. § 2 
 
It’s possible to prove the Defendant guilty of a crime even without 
evidence that the Defendant personally performed every act charged. 
Ordinarily, any act a person can do may be done by directing another 
person, or “agent.” Or it may be done by acting with or under the direction of 
others. 
A Defendant “aids and abets” a person if the Defendant intentionally 
joins with the person to commit a crime. 
A Defendant is criminally responsible for the acts of another person if the 
Defendant aids and abets the other person. A Defendant is also responsible if 
the Defendant willfully directs or authorizes the acts of an agent, employee, or 
other associate. 
But finding that a Defendant is criminally responsible for the acts of 
another person requires proof that the Defendant intentionally associated with 
or participated in the crime – not just proof that the Defendant was simply 
present at the scene of a crime or knew about it. 
In other words, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the 
Defendant was a willful participant and not merely a knowing spectator. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 32 of 38

5 
Deliberate Ignorance as Proof of Knowledge3 
 
If a Defendant’s knowledge of a fact is an essential part of a crime, it’s 
enough that the Defendant was aware of a high probability that the fact existed 
– unless the Defendant actually believed the fact didn’t exist. 
“Deliberate avoidance of positive knowledge” – which is the equivalent 
of knowledge – occurs, for example, if a defendant possesses a package and 
believes it contains a controlled substance but deliberately avoids learning that 
it contains the controlled substance so he or she can deny knowledge of the 
package’s contents. 
So you may find that a defendant knowingly made any false statement if 
you determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant (1) actually knew 
that the statement was false, or (2) had every reason to know but deliberately 
closed his or her eyes. 
But I must emphasize that negligence, carelessness, or foolishness isn’t 
enough to prove that the Defendant knew that a statement was false.  
 
 
 
 
3 See United States v. Alexandra Acosta, Case No. 23-CR-60170-RNS (S.D. Fla.) (D.E. 68 
at pp. 16). 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 33 of 38

6 
 
B12 
Verdict 
 
When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as 
foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and will speak for you 
in court. 
A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience. 
[Explain verdict] 
Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed 
on the verdict, your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it, date it, and carry it. 
Then you’ll return it to the courtroom. 
If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your 
message or question and give it to the marshal.  The marshal will bring it to me, 
and I’ll respond as promptly as possible – either in writing or by talking to you 
in the courtroom.  But I caution you not to tell me how many jurors have voted 
one way or the other at that time. 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 34 of 38

7 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-KMW(s) (GRAHAM) 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
vs. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and 
TRACY D. WADE, 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________________________/ 
 
VERDICT 
We, the Jury in the above-captioned case, unanimously find as follows: 
As to Count 1 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 3 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 4 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 35 of 38

8 
As to Count 5 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 8 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 9 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
 
 
 
SO SAY WE ALL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Foreperson (please sign) 
 
 
 
 
Date:   
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 36 of 38

9 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 23-60173-CR-KMW(s) (GRAHAM) 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
vs. 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE and 
TRACY D. WADE, 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________________________/ 
 
VERDICT 
We, the Jury in the above-captioned case, unanimously find as follows: 
As to Count 1 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant 
TRACY D. WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 2 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE:: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 3 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE:: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 37 of 38

10 
As to Count 4 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE:: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 6 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE:: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 7 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE:: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
As to Count 10 of the Superseding Indictment, we find the Defendant  
TRACY D. WADE: 
NOT GUILTY ______ GUILTY ______ 
 
 
 
SO SAY WE ALL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Foreperson (please sign) 
 
 
 
 
Date:   
 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 160   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2024   Page 38 of 38

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.160.0.pdf

Size

218,262 bytes

SHA-256

fc68d00de964c6866056f8679b80b4f5336639086072f2772d292f7acb24082d

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.160.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)