Plea Agreement — United States v. Kyle Charles Young — United States v. Natasha Ann Opsal (E.D. Wash., 2023-09-07)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 9:23-cr-80037-AMC · Doc. 22 · 2023-09-07 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO. 23-CR-80037-AMC 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
vs. 
KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, 
Defendant. 
I 
----------------
PLEA AGREEMENT 
The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (this "Office") and 
Kyle Charles Young (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant") enter into the following agreement: 
1. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to the one-count Information, which charge wire 
fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. 
2. The defendant is aware that the sentence will be imposed by the Court after considering 
the advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements (hereinafter "Sentencing 
Guidelines"). The defendant acknowledges and understands that the Court will compute an advisory 
sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines and that thJ applicable guidelines will be determined by 
the Court relying in part on the results of a pre-sentence investigation by the Court's probation office, 
which investigation will commence after the guilty plea has been entered. The defendant is also 
aware that, under certain circumstances, the Court may depart from the advisory sentencing guideline 
range that it has computed, and may raise or lower that advisory sentence under the Sentencing 
Guidelines. The defendant is further aware and understands that the Court is required to consider 
the advisory guideline range determined under the Sentencing Guidelines, but is not bound to impose 
a sentence within that advisory range; the Court is permitted to tailor the ultimate sentence in light of 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 1 of 10

other statutory concerns, and such sentence may be either more severe or less severe than the 
Sentencing Guidelines' advisory range. 
Knowing these facts, the defendant understands and 
acknowledges that the Court has the authority to impose any sentence within and up to the statutory 
maximum authorized by law for the offenses identified in paragraph 1 and that the defendant may not 
withdraw the plea solely as a result of the sentence imposed. 
3. The defendant also understands and acknowledges that the Court may impose a statutory 
maximum term of imprisonment of up to twenty (20) years, followed by a term of supervised release 
of three (3) years. In addition to a term of imprisonment and supervised release, the Court may 
impose a fine of up to two hundred and fifty thousand ($250,000) dollars, or twice the gross loss or 
gross gain; and must order restitution. Pursuant to 18 USC 3663(a)(3), the defendant agrees that he 
will make restitution in the amount of one hundred twenty-nine thousand four hundred eighty seven 
dollars ($129,487). The court may also order forfeiture. 
4. The defendant further understands and acknowledges that, in addition to any sentence 
imposed under paragraph 3 of this agreement, a special assessment of $100.00 will be imposed on the 
defendant. The defendant agrees that any special assessment imposed shall be paid at the time of 
sentencing. If a defendant is financially unable to pay the special assessment, the defendant agrees 
to present evidence to this Office and the Court at the time of sentencing as to the reasons for the 
defendant's failure to pay. 
5. This Office reserves the right to inform the Court and the probation office of all facts 
pertinent to the sentencing process, including all relevant information concerning the offenses 
committed, whether charged or not, as well as concerning the defendant and the defendant's 
background. Subject only to the express terms of any agreed-upon sentencing recommendations 
2 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 2 of 10

contained in this agreement, this Office further reserves the right to make any recommendation as to 
the quality and quantity of punishment. 
6. 
This Office and the defendant agree that, although not binding on the probation office 
or the Court, they will jointly recommend that the Court make the following findings and conclusions 
as to the sentence to be imposed: 
a. 
Base Offense Level: That the base offense level is 7, pursuant to Section 2B 1.1 (a)(l ); 
and 
b. 
Specific offense Characteristic: That the defendant should receive a 6-level upward 
adjustment as the loss was more than $40,000 but not greater than $95,000, pursuant to Section 
2B 1. l(b)(l)(D). 
7. 
This Office agrees that it will recommend at sentencing that the Court reduce by two 
levels the sentencing guideline level applicable to the defendant's offense, pursuant to Section 
3El.l(a) of the Sentencing Guidelines, based upon the defendant's recognition and affirmative and 
timely acceptance of personal responsibility. If at the time of sentencing the defendant' s offense 
level is determined to be 16 or greater, this Office will file a motion requesting an additional one level 
decrease pursuant to Section 3E 1.1 (b) of the Sentencing Guidelines, stating that the defendant has 
assisted authorities in the investigation or prosecution of the defendant's own misconduct by timely 
notifying authorities of the defendant's intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby permitting the 
government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the government and the Court to allocate their 
resources efficiently. 
This Office, however, will not be required to make this motion if the 
defendant: (1) fails or refuses to make a full, accurate and complete disclosure to the probation office 
of the circumstances surrounding the relevant offense conduct; (2) is found to have misrepresented 
facts to the government prior to entering into this plea agreement; or (3) commits any misconduct 
after entering into this plea agreement, including but not limited to committing a state or federal 
3 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 3 of 10

offense, violating any term of release, or making false statements or misrepresentations to any 
governmental entity or official. 
8. 
The defendant is aware that the sentence has not yet been determined by the Court. The 
defendant also is aware that any estimate of the probable sentencing range or sentence that the 
defendant may receive, whether that estimate comes from the defendant's attorney, this Office, or the 
probation office, is a prediction, not a promise, and is not binding on this Office, the probation office 
or the Court. The defendant understands further that any recommendation that this Office makes to 
the Court as to sentencing, whether pursuant to this agreement or otherwise, is not binding on the 
Court and the Court may disregard the recommendation in its entirety. The defendant understands 
and acknowledges, as previously acknowledged in paragraph 2 above, that the defendant may not 
withdraw his plea based upon the Court's decision not to accept a sentencing recommendation made 
by the defendant, this Office, or a recommendation made jointly by the defendant and this Office. 
9. 
The defendant agrees, in an individual and any other capacity, to forfeit to the United 
States, voluntarily and immediately, any right, title, and interest to any property, real or personal, 
which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the commission of the offense, in violation 
of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, pursuant to I 8 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A) and the provisions of 21 U.S.C. § 853. In 
addition, the defendant agrees to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p ). The 
property subject to forfeiture includes, but is not limited to: 
a. 
a forfeiture money judgment in the sum of $20,832 in U.S. currency, which 
sum represents the value the value of any property that constitutes or is derived 
from proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of the defendant's 
commission of the offense. 
10. 
The defendant further agrees that forfeiture is independent of any assessment, fine, 
cost, restitution, or penalty that may be imposed by the Court. The defendant knowingly and 
voluntarily agrees to waive all constitutional, legal, and equitable defenses to the forfeiture, including 
4 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 4 of 10

excessive fines under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In addition, the 
defendant agrees to waive: any applicable time limits for administrative or judicial forfeiture 
proceedings, the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2 and 43(a), and any appeal of the forfeiture. 
11 . 
The defendant also agrees to fully and truthfully disclose the existence, nature and 
location of all assets in which the defendant has or had any direct or indirect financial interest or 
control, and any assets involved in the offense of conviction. The defendant agrees to take all steps 
requested by the United States for the recovery and forfeiture of all assets identified by the United 
States as subject to forfeiture. This includes, but is not limited to, the timely delivery upon request 
of all necessary and appropriate documentation to deliver good and marketable title, consenting to all 
orders of forfeiture, and not contesting or impeding in any way with any criminal, civil or 
administrative forfeiture proceeding concerning the forfeiture. 
12. 
In furtherance of the satisfaction of a forfeiture money judgment entered by the Court 
in this case, the defendant agrees to the following: 
a. 
submit a financial statement to this Office upon request, within 14 calendar 
days from the request; 
b. 
maintain any asset valued in excess of $ I 0,000, and not sell, hide, waste, 
encumber, destroy, or otherwise devalue such asset without prior approval of 
the United States; 
c. 
provide information about any transfer of an asset valued in excess of$ I 0,000 
since the commencement of the offense conduct in this case to date; 
d. 
cooperate fully in the investigation and the identification of assets, including 
liquidating assets, meeting with representatives of the United States, and 
providing any documentation requested; and 
e. 
notify, within 30 days, the Clerk of the Court for the Southern District of 
Florida and this Office of: (i) any change of name, residence, or mailing 
address, and (ii) any material change in economic circumstances. 
5 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 5 of 10

The defendant further understands that providing false or incomplete information about assets, 
concealing assets, making materially false statements or representations, or making or using false 
writings or documents pertaining to assets, taking any action that would impede the forfeiture of 
assets, or failing to cooperate fully in the investigation and identification of assets may be used as a 
basis for: (i) separate prosecution, including, under 18 U.S.C. § 100 l ; or (ii) recommendation of a 
denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to the United States Sentencing 
Guidelines § 3El. l. 
13. 
This is the entire agreement and understanding between this Office and the defendant. 
There are no other agreements, promises, representations, or understandings. 
Date: 
MARKENZY LAPOINTE 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
~-;8\;H 
ASSISTA T UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 
B~
A0 
-~
TY MILITELLO 
ASSIST A T FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER 
Counsel fi r Kyle Charles Young, Defendant 
6 
RLES YOUNG 
DANT 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 6 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO. 23-CR-80037-AMC 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
vs. 
KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, 
Defendant. 
I 
---------------
STIPULATED FACTUAL BASIS 
The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and the 
Defendant, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, stipulate to the following facts, and stipulate that such 
facts, in accordance with Rule 1 l(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, provide a 
sufficient factual basis for the plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Information which charge the 
defendant with wire fraud, in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343. 
I, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, hereby acknowledges that the Government could prove the 
following facts beyond a reasonable doubt: 
1. 
Kyle Charles Young, P .L. was a Florida limited liability company with a registered 
address in Palm Beach, Florida. KYLE CHARLES YOUNG was the managing member of Kyle 
Charles Young, P .L. 
2. 
Foreclosure Defender, PL., was a Florida limited liability company with a 
registered address in Palm Beach, Florida. KYLE CHARLES YOUNG was the managing member 
of Foreclosure Defender, PL. 
3. 
During the period of in and around April 2020 and continuing through in and 
around April 2021, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG submitted and caused to be submitted several loan 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 7 of 10

applications under the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program and the Paycheck 
protection Program, which were developed under the CARES Act. EIDL program was a U.S. 
Small Business Administration (SBA) program that existed before the COYID-19 pandemic to 
provide low-interest financing to eligible small business, renters, and homeowners in regions 
affected by declared disasters. The CARES Act authorized forgivable loans to qualified businesses 
and other organizations for job retention and certain other expenses, through the Paycheck 
Protection Program (PPP). Such businesses were required to use PPP loan proceeds on payroll 
costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. 
4. 
KYLE CHARLES YOUNG submitted or caused to be submitted several fraudulent 
CARES Act applications in his name or the names of his businesses during the 2020-2021 period. 
Five PPP loan applications and one EIDL application were approved and funded. The following 
is a list of three of the loan applications submitted by KYLE CHARLES YOUNG: 
a. 
On April 7, 2020, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, submitted or caused to be 
submitted via wire, in interstate commerce, an EIDL application on behalf of Kyle Charles 
Young, P .L. with a listed address in Palm Beach, FL, and sought approximately $28,000 
in EIDL funds. KYLE CHARLES YOUNG executed the loan agreement and falsely 
represented the gross revenues of Kyle Charles Young, P .L., during the 12-month period 
prior to the date of the COVID pandemic. The application was approved and funded by 
SBA and the funds were disbursed into a JPMorgan Chase account ending in 7306 for 
which the Defendant is the sole signatory. The government would offer documentary and 
testimonial evidence, to include witness statements and the entity's bank account, proving 
that the stated gross revenue was false, including evidence that Kyle Charles Young, P.L. 
was administratively dissolved in September 2018 and the Defendant's statement that the 
entity was not operational during the relevant years. 
b. 
On April 20, 2020, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, submitted or caused to be 
submitted via wire, in interstate commerce, a PPP application on behalf of Kyle Charles 
Young, P.L. with a listed address in Palm Beach, FL. 
The application sought 
approximately $18,770 in PPP funds based on reported monthly average payroll of 
$7,508.00. KYLE CHARLES YOUNG executed the loan agreement. The application was 
approved and funded through Customers Bank and the funds were disbursed into a 
JPMorgan Chase account ending in 7306, for which the Defendant is the sole signatory. 
2 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 8 of 10

The government would offer documentary and testimonial evidence, to include witness 
statements and the entity's bank account, proving that the stated reported monthly average 
payroll was false, including evidence that Kyle Charles Young, P.L. was administratively 
dissolved in September 2018 and the ~
fondant's stat. ement that the entity was not 
operational during the relevan:;t ~ 
e 
c. 
On April 26, 20~ KYLE HARLES YOUNG, submitted or caused to be 
submitted via wire, in interstate commerce, a PPP application on behalf of Foreclosure 
Defender PL, with a listed address in Palm Beach, FL. 
The application sought 
approximately $20,832 in PPP funds based on reported that the entity was an entity eligible 
for CARES Act funding, in that, the entity was operational during the COVID pandemic 
period. KYLE CHARLES YOUNG executed the loan agreement. The application was 
approved and funded by Prestamos CDFI, LLC, a SBA authorized lender, and the funds 
were disbursed into a 
avy Fed Credit Union bank account ending in 0106, for which the 
Defendant is the sole signatory. The government would offer documentary and testimonial 
evidence, to include witness statements and the entity's bank account, proving that the 
stated reported monthly average payroll was false, including evidence that Foreclosure 
Defender PL was administratively dissolved in September 2014 and the Defendant's 
statement that the entity was not operational during the relevant years. 
5. 
In a post-Miranda statement, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG admitted to committing 
wire fraud, advised that the beneficiary entities had been previously dissolved and not operational, 
no income was derived from the entities, and that the PPP and EIDL proceeds received were not 
used as proscribed, but for personal use, including travel and certain medical expenses. 
6. 
I, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, am entering a plea of guilty to the Information, 
which charges an offense of wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 
1343. I understand and acknowledge that the elements of this offense are as follows: 
The elements of wire fraud are: 
(1) The defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to defraud, or to 
obtain money or property by using false 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. 
3 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 9 of 10

I, KYLE CHARLES YOUNG, admit that the statements contained in this factual proffer 
are true and correct. I further acknowledge that I have reviewed this factual proffer with my 
attorney, and I am satisfied with the representation of my attorney in thi 
atter. 
Dare ~) 
Date: crtira ~ 
I 
ACCEPTED: 
Date: ~
~ 
By: 
KRISTY MILITELLO 
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 
MARKENZY LAPOINTE 
UNITED .~,..._,_,.., S ATTORNEY 
4 
.. 
Case 9:23-cr-80037-AMC   Document 22   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/07/2023   Page 10 of 10

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.637196.22.0.pdf

Size

372,146 bytes

SHA-256

5ab601c546b77707ff9486624163469d483d53af4d57494d4ad7209861bad40b

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.637196.22.0.pdf

Original

No public link identified.