Government's Supplemental Sentencing Submission — United States v. Adedayo Ilori

Summary

A supplemental sentencing letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Lewis J. Liman, dated and filed March 1, 2022 as Doc. 128 in United States v. Adedayo Ilori, 20 Cr. 378 (LJL). It responds to the defendant's February 28, 2022 submission (Dkt. No. 124) and argues that a sentence within the stipulated Guidelines range of 51 to 63 months' imprisonment remains appropriate. The government contends that the defendant took part in the second round of $250,000 loan applications in what it calls the Loan Scheme, citing recorded calls and PSR paragraphs. It lists four alleged violations while on pretrial release involving stolen identities and describes his prior convictions. A footnote states the government is not asking the court to consider conduct charged in Indictment 21 Cr. 746 (MKV).

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

        Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL         Document 128          Filed 03/01/22          Page 1 of 4



                                                      U.S. Department of Justice

                                                      United States Attorney
                                                      Southern District of New York


                                                      The Silvio J. Mollo Building
                                                      One Saint Andrew’s Plaza
                                                      New York, New York 10007


                                                      March 1, 2022
BY ECF

The Honorable Lewis J. Liman
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007

       Re:     United States v. Adedayo Ilori, 20 Cr. 378 (LJL)

Dear Judge Liman:

        The Government respectfully submits this supplemental sentencing submission in response
to the defendant’s supplemental submission dated February 28, 2022. (Dkt. No. 124). A sentence
within the Guidelines range stipulated in the parties’ plea agreement, namely 51 to 63 months’
imprisonment (the “Stipulated Guidelines”), remains appropriate in this case, particularly in light
of the defendant’s pretrial violations and criminal history.

         First, in his supplemental submission, Ilori continues to minimize his role in the Loan
Scheme to which he pled guilty. Ilori again claims he was minimally involved in the second round
of loan applications in the Loan Scheme. This is not so. The Government rebutted this claim in
its original sentencing submission but reiterates several key facts here showing Ilori remained a
full participant in the Loan Scheme during the second round of four loans of $250,000 each. Ilori
was responsible for preparing two of the $5,000 loan applications in the first round of loans that
used Pennsylvania and Illinois driver’s licenses in the name of identity theft victims, and Ilori
prepared one of the $250,000 loan applications in the second round of loans that used the same
Pennsylvania driver’s license. (PSR ¶ 42). Ilori was the source of the two stolen identities used
for those three loan applications, and Ilori prepared the three fraudulent loan applications. (PSR
¶¶ 32, 37). That Ilori was the source of these fraudulent applications is demonstrated by the fact
that Ilori explicitly discussed in multiple recorded conversations that he could obtain identification
information and make fake documents, that he would use driver’s licenses with real identifying
information but the photographs of other people, and that he had opened bank accounts using the
identities of other people to execute the Loan Scheme. (PSR ¶¶ 21, 22, 23). 1 Ilori’s fingerprints

1
  The Pennsylvania and Illinois identification cards submitted in the first and second round of
loans in the Loan Scheme depict the face of Chris Recamier, Ilori’s co-defendant in Indictment
21 Cr. 746 (MKV). In addition, a copy of a bank statement submitted with the fraudulent loan
applications in the Loan Scheme was found on one of the cellphones seized from the Mercedes
        Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL          Document 128         Filed 03/01/22      Page 2 of 4




were also recovered from the physical loan applications Chancy mailed to an undercover
mailbox—including from the $250,000 loan application that used the Pennsylvania driver’s
license. (PSR ¶¶ 32, 37). Ilori knew that the goal of the Loan Scheme was to apply for a second
round of larger loans and participated in the second round of loans. On November 19, 2019, Ilori
participated in a meeting in which the undercover agent stated explicitly that the Loan Scheme
would start with four loans at $5,000 each and a second round of loans for $250,000. (PSR ¶ 29).
Despite Ilori’s claim that Chancy sought in January 2020 to restrict his involvement in the second
round of loans, on February 8, 2020, on a recorded call, Ilori told the CS he wanted to do a second
round of loans, (PSR ¶ 35), and that he had bank statements ready for the new loans. Over the
next several days, Chancy described to the CS in a series of calls that Ilori and Chancy were
discussing what account or accounts Ilori should use in the second round of loans. Less than two
weeks after these calls, Chancy mailed the second round of loan applications, including the
$250,000 application using the Pennsylvania license prepared by Ilori, thus clearly demonstrating
Ilori participated in the Loan Scheme to the end.

         Second, in his supplemental submission, Ilori includes a report evaluating his mental
health as purported mitigation. The Court should afford little weight to the report. The report is
based entirely on uncorroborated information about Ilori’s upbringing provided by Ilori, whose
credibility is questionable at best. Nothing in the report indicates that Ilori’s mental health affects
his ability to tell right from wrong or makes him likelier to commit fraud—repeatedly. Nor does
Ilori’s purportedly difficult childhood excuse Ilori’s repeated criminal conduct. Ultimately, the
report offers no insight supporting mitigation, and the Court should discount it.

           Lastly, the Government submits that a sentence within the Stipulated Guidelines range is
appropriate given Ilori committed new crimes involving stolen identities and fraud while on
pretrial release. Ilori committed the following violations and crimes while on pretrial supervision
in this case: 2

               1. In or about Summer 2021, Ilori rented an apartment at 123 Melrose Street in
                  Brooklyn under a false identity. In renting this apartment, Ilori used a fake ID
                  card with his own picture but another person’s identity. Ilori did not disclose
                  this residence to Pretrial (the “Apartment Violation”);

               2. In or about September 2021, Ilori and Chris Recamier leased a Mercedes using
                  a stolen identity (the “Car Violation”);




Ilori was driving on October 8, 2021, pursuant to a search warrant—except the name and date on
the bank statement had been changed.
2
  As the Government has previously represented, the Government is not asking the Court to
consider Ilori’s involvement in a Paycheck Protection Program fraud scheme that took place
while Ilori was on pretrial release. That conduct is the subject of Indictment 21 Cr. 746 (MKV),
and for the purpose of this sentencing, the Government is not seeking to litigate the defendant’s
responsibility in that multi-million dollar fraud scheme.
                                                  2
           Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL               Document 128            Filed 03/01/22         Page 3 of 4




                    3. In or about summer and fall 2021, Ilori made purchases using a bank card in the
                       name of a stolen identity (the “Purchases Violation”); and

                    4. At the time of his arrest, Ilori possessed ID and bank cards in the names of
                       stolen identities, including the identity on the bank card used in the Purchase
                       Violation (the “Possession Violation”).

        These violations are in the same vein as the underlying conduct in this case and Ilori’s
numerous prior convictions for fraud and forgery. These most recent violations eliminate any
doubt that Ilori is a serious recidivist who requires substantial deterrence. Again and again,
undeterred by any legal consequences, Ilori has used stolen identities to make fraudulent charges
for his own personal financial gain. Ilori has not been deterred by his five prior convictions and
four arrests related to fraud and forgery, and he has not been deterred by the sentences he received,
including terms of imprisonment of 15 months, 24 months, 42 months to seven years, and 30
months to five years. Ilori was not deterred from continuing the Loan Scheme after his arrest in
June 2019 by the NYPD for forged instruments and identity theft. 3 Ilori was not deterred from
committing the four pretrial violations while awaiting sentencing in this case. A sentence within
the Stipulated Guidelines is thus necessary to deter Ilori from committing additional fraud and to
protect the public from further crimes committed by Ilori. A sentence within the Stipulated
Guidelines is also necessary to achieve general deterrence by demonstrating that defendants who
commit additional crimes while under court supervision will be seriously punished.

         Moreover, the pretrial violations indicate that a sentence within the Stipulated Guidelines
is necessary to promote respect for the law. The fact that Ilori committed these violations while
awaiting sentencing in this case and on home confinement demonstrate Ilori’s total lack of respect
for the law and lack of remorse for his criminal conduct. While committing these violations, in
September 2021, Ilori submitted a letter to the Court in advance of sentencing requesting leniency
and claiming he could not “gamble or feel pressured to do anything illegal in [his] life going
forward” and that he wanted to “disassociate [him]self completely from all elements of
criminality.” Ilori’s pretrial violations reveal the hypocrisy of Ilori’s representations to the Court
for Ilori was committing the pretrial violations—i.e., new fraud crimes—at the time he made these
representations to the Court.




3
    The charges brought by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office as a result of this arrest remain pending.

                                                            3
       Case 1:20-cr-00378-LJL         Document 128        Filed 03/01/22      Page 4 of 4




        For these reasons, and the reasons stated in the Government’s prior sentencing submission,
a sentence within the Stipulated Guidelines is appropriate.

                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                    DAMIAN WILLIAMS
                                                    United States Attorney
                                             By:    /s/
                                                    Cecilia Vogel
                                                    Tara LaMorte
                                                    Daniel G. Nessim
                                                    Assistant United States Attorneys
                                                    (212) 637-1084 / -1041 / -2486
Cc:    Brooke Cucinella (via ECF)




                                                4


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.nysd.540905.128.0.pdf

Size

198,351 bytes

SHA-256

cafb47c1ade0dbe65457ad5ec2a2e8a959ed00e0ac9b863f14a8b5142f5d6fc1

Our copy

gov.uscourts.nysd.540905.128.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)