Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings United States v. Al Clint LaRoche Objections to the Presentence Report — U.S. v. LaRoche

Court filing

Objections to the Presentence Report — U.S. v. LaRoche

Filed April 27, 2023 in U.S. v. Laroche; one of 13 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Fort Myers Division)
Filed2023-04-27

U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Fort Myers Division) · No. 2:23-cr-00013-TPB-NPM · Doc. 32 · 2023-04-27 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA  
 
CASE NO.: 2:23-CR-00013-TPB-NPM 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AL CLINT LAROCHE,  
Defendant. 
                                     / 
 
OBJECTIONS TO THE PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT 
 
The Defendant, AL CLINT LAROCHE, by and through his undersigned 
attorney, hereby files his objections and disputed facts to the Presentence 
Investigation Report in the above styled case, and states: 
 
1. 
The Defendant objects to page 9, paragraph 45, Background: The 
Defendant objects to the 2-point enhancement pursuant to 2B1.1(b)(10)(C). The 
PSR alleges that this enhancement is applicable because the offense involved 
sophisticated means and the Defendant intentionally engaged in or caused the 
conduct constituting sophisticated means. The PSR specifically alleges that the 
Defendant submitted fraudulent and altered Quarterly Federal Tax returns and 
fraudulent Profit and Loss Statements for Bornwild, LLC. However, the Defendant 
maintains that he was following the directions of Daniel Tisone. The Defendant did 
not have the knowledge, sophistication, or ability to prepare and submit fraudulent 
Quarterly Tax Returns and fraudulent Profit and Loss Statements. Mr. Tisone 
Case 2:23-cr-00013-TPB-NPM     Document 32     Filed 04/27/23     Page 1 of 4 PageID 146

2 
 
prepared the paperwork and documentation that was submitted, both for the initial 
PPP Loan, as well as the fraudulent tax returns and Profit Statements. The Defendant 
was a pawn in Tisone’s scheme to defraud the PPP Loan system. While the scheme 
set up by Mr. Tisone was sophisticated, the Defendant’s involvement was just a 
body to help Tisone carry out this scheme. Tisone recruited the Defendant for this 
PPP Loan scheme, for which the Defendant sent Tisone over $100,00.00 of the 
initial proceeds. In addition, it was Tisone who supplied all the false information that 
was used to acquire the second PPP draw. The Defendant has provided all this 
information to the Government stating that he was recruited by Tisone to participate 
in this PPP Loan scheme.  
 
2. 
The Defendant objects to page 9, paragraphs 46. Background. The 
Defendant objects to the 3-level enhancement pursuant to USSG 2B1.1(b)(17)(A). 
The Defendant objects to this 3-level enhancement because the loss amount is being 
double counted. In paragraph 44, the PSI finds that the Defendant is responsible for 
$1,078.652.50 in actual loss to the SBA and Blue Ridge Bank, which results in a 14 
level enhancement of USSG 2B1.1(b)(1)(H). However, paragraph 46 is using that 
same loss amount to further add an additional 3 level enhancement. The Defendant 
maintains that this second enhancement is unwarranted. 
 
3. 
The Defendant further submits that he is entitled to a Mitigating Role in 
the Offense pursuant to 3B1.2(b). As previously stated herein, the Defendant did not 
Case 2:23-cr-00013-TPB-NPM     Document 32     Filed 04/27/23     Page 2 of 4 PageID 147

3 
 
think up this scheme on his own. The Defendant was recruited by Daniel Tisone to 
sign paperwork that was prepared by Tisone, and updated, when necessary, by 
Tisone. While the Defendant admits that he did profit from this scheme, the 
Defendant submits that he was a minor participant and should receive a two level 
decrease in his base offense level.   
 
3. 
The Defendant maintains that his new base offense level should be 16, 
with a criminal History category of I, which results in an advisory sentencing range 
of 21-27 months in the BOP. This advisory sentencing range does not include any 
potential variance arguments which will be made by the Defense.  
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, AL CLINT LAROCHE, respectfully requests 
this Honorable Court to grant these objections as stated herein.  
Respectfully submitted, 
 
GLENN H. MITCHELL, ESQ. 
The Barristers Building  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1615 Forum Place, Suite 4B 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
ghmitchelllaw@aol.com  
Pleadings: ghmitchellfiling@aol.com 
(561) 478-7777 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Glenn H. Mitchell  
 
By:                                     
 
 
GLENN H. MITCHELL, ESQ. 
                                  
Florida Bar No. 239267 
 
 
Case 2:23-cr-00013-TPB-NPM     Document 32     Filed 04/27/23     Page 3 of 4 PageID 148

4 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I hereby certify that on April 27, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing 
document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the 
foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record via 
transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other 
authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive 
electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Glenn H. Mitchell  
 
By:                                     
 
 
GLENN H. MITCHELL, ESQ. 
                                  
Florida Bar No. 239267 
Case 2:23-cr-00013-TPB-NPM     Document 32     Filed 04/27/23     Page 4 of 4 PageID 149

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flmd.410261.32.0.pdf
Size
112,891 bytes
SHA-256
dc5ed30af3a5eb94bd17e09f7225d2e005061d9727f85e97fb4cbaeda766767d
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flmd.410261.32.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top