Consent Motion for Preliminary Order of Forfeiture for Proceeds — United States v. Rogers (M.D. Fla.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville Division) · No. 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH · Doc. 51 · 2025-08-13 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  
 
 
 
v. 
  
Case No. 3:24-cr-190-WWB-SJH 
 
CARNISHA MAURICA ROGERS 
 
UNITED STATES' CONSENT MOTION FOR  
PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE FOR PROCEEDS 
 
The United States moves the Court, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 
U.S.C. § 2461(c), Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(2), and the defendant’s plea agreement, for 
entry of a preliminary order of forfeiture for proceeds in the amount of $20,832, 
representing the amount of proceeds the defendant admits she obtained as a result of 
the wire fraud offense charged in Count Eight of the Indictment. In support of its motion, 
the United States submits the following. 
MEMORANDUM OF LAW 
l. 
Statement of Facts 
 
 
A.  
Allegations Against the Defendant  
1. 
The defendant was charged in an Indictment, in pertinent part, with wire 
fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Count Eight). Doc. 1.  
2. 
The forfeiture allegations in the Indictment notified the defendant that, 
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the United States would 
forfeit any property constituting or derived from proceeds the defendant obtained, 
directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation, including, but not limited to, an order of 
forfeiture for at least $20,832. Id. at 16-17. 
 
 
Case 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH     Document 51     Filed 08/13/25     Page 1 of 5 PageID 165

2 
 
B.  
Finding of Guilt and Admissions Related to Forfeiture 
3. 
In pertinent part, the defendant pleaded guilty to Count Eight. Docs. 40, 
43. This Court accepted the defendant’s guilty plea and adjudicated her guilty. Doc. 46.    
4. 
The defendant admitted in her Plea Agreement (Doc. 42 at 23-28) that she 
made materially false statements and representations in an application for a Paycheck 
Protection Program (PPP) loan, and that based on those statements and 
representations, she caused a wire in the amount of $20,832 to be sent to her personal 
bank account at Fifth Third Bank. Id. at 26-28. She also admitted that she used the 
fraudulently obtained loan proceeds for her own personal enrichment. Id. at 27. 
 
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the defendant 
admitted and agreed that the United States was entitled to an order of forfeiture in the 
amount of $20,832, representing the amount of proceeds the defendant personally 
obtained as a result of the wire fraud offense. Doc. 42 at 7-8. Moreover, the defendant 
admitted that all of the fraudulently obtained proceeds were transferred to third parties 
and could not be located upon the exercise of due diligence. Id. Lastly, the defendant 
agreed that the order of forfeiture would be final upon entry. Id. at 9.  
 II. 
Applicable Law 
 
 
A. 
Forfeiture Authority  
 
The Court’s authority to order civil forfeiture of property for violations of 18 U.S.C. 
§ 1343 is found in 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C). Section 981(a)(1)(C) provides for the civil 
forfeiture of any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds 
from any offense constituting “specified unlawful activity” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 
1956(c)(7). A “specified unlawful activity,” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7), includes 
Case 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH     Document 51     Filed 08/13/25     Page 2 of 5 PageID 166

3 
offenses listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1) includes violations of 18 
U.S.C. § 1343. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the government is authorized to forfeit 
this property criminally, and the procedures for the forfeiture and disposition of the 
property are governed by 21 U.S.C. § 853. 
 
 
B. 
Court’s Determination of Forfeiture  
 
Pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(2), because the United States could not locate all the 
specific property constituting or derived from the proceeds the defendant obtained from 
her wire fraud offense, the United States seeks an order of forfeiture against the 
defendant in the amount of proceeds she obtained from her offense. Indeed, for cases 
in which the defendant no longer has the actual dollars or property traceable to 
proceeds in his possession, or the government cannot locate those assets, the 
obligation to forfeit simply takes the form of an order of forfeiture in favor of the United 
States. See United States v. Padron, 527 F.3d 1156, 1161-62 (11th Cir. 2008). 
 
 Rule 32.2(b)(1)(B) provides that the court must determine the amount of money 
that the defendant will be ordered to pay. The Court’s determination may be based on 
evidence submitted by the parties and accepted by the Court as relevant and reliable. 
Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(1)(B). As the defendant has agreed, she personally obtained 
$20,832 from the wire fraud offense charged in Count Eight. If the Court finds the 
$20,832 was obtained from in the wire fraud offense, and that the defendant has 
dissipated those funds, then it is appropriate for the Court to enter a preliminary order of 
forfeiture against the defendant in that amount pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(2).  
 
 
Case 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH     Document 51     Filed 08/13/25     Page 3 of 5 PageID 167

4 
III. 
Conclusion 
For the reasons stated above, the United States requests that, pursuant to 18 
U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b), the Court 
enter a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture for Proceeds against the defendant in the 
amount of $20,832.  
The United States further requests that, because the $20,832 in proceeds was 
dissipated by the defendant, the United States may seek, as a substitute asset, 
pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated by 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), forfeiture of 
any of the defendant’s property up to the value of $20,832.  
The United States further requests that, in accordance with her Plea Agreement 
(Doc. 42 at 9), the Preliminary Order of Forfeiture for Proceeds become final as to the 
defendant at the time it is entered.  
 
 As required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(B), the United States requests that the 
Court include the forfeiture when orally pronouncing the sentence and include the 
forfeiture order in the judgment. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(B) and United States v. 
Kennedy, 201 F.3d 1324, 1326 (11th Cir. 2000). 
Case 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH     Document 51     Filed 08/13/25     Page 4 of 5 PageID 168

5 
The United States further requests that the Court retain jurisdiction to order any 
substitute assets forfeited to the United States up to the amount of the order of 
forfeiture. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
By: 
Respectfully Submitted, 
 
GREGORY W. KEHOE 
United States Attorney 
 
s/Jennifer M. Harrington  
JENNIFER M. HARRINGTON 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Florida Bar No. 0117748 
400 W. Washington Street, Suite 3100 
Orlando, Florida 32801  
Telephone: (407) 648-7500 
Facsimile: (407) 648-7643 
Email: Jennifer.Harrington2@usdoj.gov    
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
 
I hereby certify that on August 13, 2025, I electronically filed the foregoing with 
the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of 
electronic filing to counsel of record. 
 
s/Jennifer M. Harrington  
JENNIFER M. HARRINGTON 
Assistant United States Attorney 
 
 
Case 3:24-cr-00190-WWB-SJH     Document 51     Filed 08/13/25     Page 5 of 5 PageID 169

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flmd.433477.51.0.pdf

Size

131,541 bytes

SHA-256

4ec8d31349017b167f8ccac5e16abcf2da206bf11649e905fc837daa8f73e396

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flmd.433477.51.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)