Case docket
United States v. Hashim Campbell — U.S. District Court, E.D.N.Y.
United States v. Campbell — 16 court filings in the archive from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, filed between September 17, 2021 and March 23, 2023. Among them: 2 orders, 2 judgments and 1 information.
Shares documents with: United States v. Charlene Wint — 9 public filings; 1 document appears on both pages.
Case facts
| Court | U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York |
|---|---|
| Filings | 16 public filings |
| Filed | 2021-09-17 – 2023-03-23 |
| Document types | orders (2), judgments (2), information (1), transcript (1), proposed order (1), sentencing memorandum (1) |
Case summary
Hashim Campbell was charged by criminal information on September 23, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, No. 1:21-cr-00478-FB, and pleaded guilty the same day to the sole count, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. The court accepted the plea on October 13, 2021. The restitution memorandum records that Campbell and a co-defendant participated in a scheme to defraud the Paycheck Protection Program, and that Campbell agreed in his plea agreement that he was individually accountable for a loss of $1,200,000. Judgment was entered November 22, 2022: one month in custody, two years of supervised release including six months of home detention, and a forfeiture money judgment of $100,000.00. An amended judgment of March 23, 2023 followed a restitution order of $300,000.
Case at a glance
| Defendant(s) | Hashim Campbell; the restitution memorandum and order also covers co-defendant Charlene Wint |
|---|---|
| Court and docket | U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 1:21-cr-00478-FB |
| Program | Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) |
| Charges | Sole count of the information, 18 U.S.C. § 1349 — conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud |
| Outcome and sentence | Pleaded guilty September 23, 2021; judgment November 22, 2022 imposing one month in custody and two years of supervised release with six months of home detention; forfeiture money judgment of $100,000.00; restitution of $300,000 ordered March 10, 2023; amended judgment March 23, 2023 |
| Counts of conviction | Pleaded guilty to count one of an information, conspiracy to commit wire and bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1349, offense ended 8/31/2020 (judgment of November 22, 2022, p. 1; amended judgment of March 23, 2023, p. 1) |
| Sentence imposed | One month in custody (p. 2); two years of supervised release (p. 3), with six months of home detention with voice verification monitoring and 200 hours of community service (p. 4) (judgment of November 22, 2022); the amended judgment of March 23, 2023 prints the same custody, supervised release and home detention terms (Dkt. 27, pp. 2-4) |
| Restitution | Judgment of November 22, 2022: restitution $0.00, "The determination of restitution is deferred until 2/17/2023" (p. 6, image checked); amended judgment of March 23, 2023: $300,000.00, payee printed as "The Victim Information", interest waived for restitution, payable immediately and at 10% of gross monthly income (Dkt. 27, pp. 6-7) |
| Fine and assessment | Fine $0.00; special assessment $100.00 (judgment of November 22, 2022, p. 6); amended judgment: assessment $100.00 (Dkt. 27, p. 6) |
| Forfeiture | "The defendant shall comply with the order of forfeiture dated 11/17/22 contained in this judgment" (p. 7; the amended judgment prints 11/17/2022, Dkt. 27, p. 8); order of forfeiture entered November 22, 2022: forfeiture money judgment of $100,000.00 (Dkt. 21, p. 1) |
| Status checked | 2026-09-23 · against DOJ press releases through 2026-09-22; court docket not yet read |
How did the court arrive at the restitution figure?
The government asked that Campbell and Wint be held jointly and severally liable with other participants for $3,500,000 plus interest. The court found the government had not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the victim bank lost that sum, declined joint and several liability, and imposed $300,000 on Campbell — the $100,000 he accepted plus additional funds — and $100,000 on Wint. Restitution is due immediately but payable at 10% of gross monthly income.
What did the filings say about the scheme?
The restitution memorandum states that Campbell personally contributed to obtaining over $1 million in fraudulent loans through two tax preparation businesses he owned, that he accepted $100,000 in commission, and that the government argued he was directly responsible for $1,706,426.02 in losses through those two companies.
What sentence did the government ask for?
Its sentencing letter argued that a sentence within the guidelines range of 33 to 41 months' imprisonment was appropriate.
Summary written from the documents on this page; every sentence is sourced.
Filings
16 public filings from this case, in filing-date order.
- Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge Roanne L — United States v. Campbell (Dkt. 3-2, E.D.N.Y.)Dkt. 3-2 · PDF
- Criminal Information — United States v. Hashim CampbellInformation
- Consent Order to have the plea — United States v. Campbell (Dkt. 10, E.D.N.Y.)Dkt. 10 · PDF
- Plea Hearing Transcript — United States v. Hashim CampbellTranscript
- Proposed Order of Forfeiture — United States v. Hashim CampbellProposed order
- Order Accepting Guilty Plea — United States v. Hashim CampbellOrder
- First Motion to Travel to Michigan Thursday, May 12-Monday 16 — United States v. Campbell (Dkt. 16, E.D.N.Y.)Dkt. 16 · PDF
- First Motion to Travel to Michigan Thursday, May 12-Monday — United States v. Campbell (Dkt. 16-1, E.D.N.Y.)Dkt. 16-1 · PDF
- Defense Sentencing Memorandum — United States v. Hashim CampbellSentencing memorandum
- Government Sentencing Letter — United States v. Hashim Campbell
- Final Order of Forfeiture — United States v. Hashim CampbellOrder
- Judgment in a Criminal Case — United States v. Hashim CampbellJudgment
- Government Restitution Letter — United States v. Hashim Campbell
- Defense Restitution Letter — United States v. Hashim Campbell
- Restitution Memorandum and Order — United States v. Hashim Campbell and Charlene Wint (E.D.N.Y.)
- Amended Judgment — United States v. Hashim CampbellJudgment
Court, dates and docket numbers are as recorded on the filings.