Indictment — U.S. v. Stanberry

Record facts

U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida · No. 3:26-cr-00052-TKW · Doc. 1 · 2026-04-07 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_ Filed 04/07/26 Page1of7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Vv. INDICTMENT

DOMINIQUE J. STANBERRY 3°20 0r52- TKW

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:
COUNTS ONE AND TWO
A. INTRODUCTION

At all times material to this Indictment:

1. The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an
executive-branch agency of the United States government that provides support to
entrepreneurs and small businesses. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and
strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the establishment and viability of
small businesses and by assisting in the economic recovery of communities after
disasters.

2. As part of this effort, the SBA enabled and provided for loans through
banks, credit unions, and other lenders. These loans had government-backed

guarantees.

Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_ Filed 04/07/26 Page 2 of 7

The Paycheck Protection Program

3. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act
was a federal law enacted in or around March 2020 and was designed to provide
emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans who were suffering
the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief
provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of up to $349 billion in
forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses,
through a program referred to as the SBA Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”).
In or around April 2020, Congress authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP
funding.

4. Jn order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to
submit a PPP loan application on an SBA Form 2483. The PPP loan application
required the business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the
program rules and make certain affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to
obtain the PPP loan. In the PPP loan application, the small business (through its
authorized representative) was required to certify, among other things, its: (a)
average monthly payroll expenses, and (b) number of employees. These figures
were used to calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to
receive under the PPP. In addition, businesses applying for a PPP loan were

required to provide documentation showing their payroll expenses and that they
2
Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_ Filed 04/07/26 Page 3of7

were in business as of February 15, 2020. Further, businesses applying for a PPP
loan were required to make good faith certifications, including that economic
uncertainties had necessitated their loan requests for continued business
operations, and that they intended to use loan proceeds only for the authorized,
and not any duplicative, purposes.

5. PPP loan applications were required to be signed by an authorized
representative of the business. By signing PPP loan applications, applicants
attested that the information provided in the application and in all supporting
documents and forms was true and accurate, and that the applicant understood that
knowingly making a false statement to obtain a PPP loan was a crime.

6. PPP loan proceeds must have been used by the business on certain
permissible expenses, such as payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and
utilities. The SBA allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely
forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on these expense items within a
designated period of time (usually eight weeks of receiving the proceeds) and used
at least 75% of the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

7. A PPP loan application was required to be processed by a
participating financial institution (“the lender’’). If a PPP loan application was
approved, the lender funded the PPP loan using its own monies, which were 100%

guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the loan application, including information
3
Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_ Filed 04/07/26 Page4of7

about the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of
employees, was electronically transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the course
of processing the loan.

B. THE CHARGE

Between on or about March 26, 2021, and on or about October 7, 2021, in

the Northern District of Florida and elsewhere, the defendant,
DOMINIQUE J. STANBERRY,
did knowingly and willfully devise, and intend to devise, a scheme to defraud and
for obtaining money and property by means of material false and fraudulent
pretenses, representations, and promises, and for the purpose of executing such
scheme, did cause a wire communication to be transmitted in interstate commerce.
C. SCHEME TO DEFRAUD

It was part of the scheme to defraud that:

I. The defendant, DOMINIQUE J. STANBERRY (“STANBERRY”),
made and caused to be made false and fraudulent representations in a PPP loan
application submitted online to Harvest Small Business Finance, LLC (“HSBF”),
via Womply, in her name. Specifically, STANBERRY falsely represented that she
had been self-employed with a business in her name since 2016 and that her self-
employment earned an approximate gross income of $100,000 in 2020. In support

of this fraudulent PPP loan application, STANBERRY electronically submitted
4
Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_- Filed 04/07/26 Page5of7

documentation to Womply, including a false 2020 Internal Revenue Service
(“IRS”) Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business (Form 1040) form.

2. STANBERRY caused HSBF to disburse PPP loan proceeds via
electronic funds transfer to a Wells Fargo Bank account ending in 3973 under
STANBERRY’s control. STANBERRY did not use the funds received for
authorized business purposes as promised and instead converted the funds to her
own personal use.

3. By this conduct, STANBERRY fraudulently obtained approximately
$20,833 in money and property to which she was not entitled.

D. WIRE COMMUNICATIONS

On or about the following dates, in the Northern District of Florida and

elsewhere, the defendant,
DOMINIQUE J. STANBERRY,
for the purpose of executing this scheme to defraud, did cause wire

communications to be transmitted in interstate commerce as set forth below:

COUNT DATE TRANSACTION

ONE March 26, 2021 Transmission of PPP Borrower Application
Form for Dominique Stanberry

Electronic funds transfer of approximately
TWO April 14, 2021 $20,833 to Wells Fargo Bank account ending
in 3973

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

5
Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Documenti_ Filed 04/07/26 Page 6of7

CRIMINAL FORFEITURE

The allegations in Counts One and Two of this Indictment are hereby
realleged and incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeiture.
From the defendant’s engagement in the violation alleged in Counts One and Two
of this Indictment, the defendant,

DOMINIQUE J. STANBERRY,

shall forfeit to the United States of America pursuant to Title 18, United States
Code, Section 982(a)(2), Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and
Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any and all of the defendant’s right,
title, and interest in any property, real and personal, constituting and derived from
proceeds traceable to such offenses.

If any of the property described above as being subject to forfeiture, as a
result of any act or omission of the defendant:

i. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

ii. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third person;

iii. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of this Court;

iv. has been substantially diminished in value; or

Vv. has been commingled with other property that cannot be divided

without difficulty,
Case 3:26-cr-00052-TKW Document1_ Filed 04/07/26 Page 7 of 7

it is the intent of the United States, pursuant to Title 21, United States Code,
Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(b)(1)
and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), to seek forfeiture of any other

property of said defendant up to the value of the forfeitable property.

A TRUE BILL:

JOHN’P>HEEKIN ©

United States Attorney

ALICIA H. FORBES
Assistant United States Attorney

“THOMAS S.P. GEEKER
Assistant United States Attorney

File and source

File

United_States_v._STANBERRY__flnd_3-26-cr-00052__doc1__gov.uscourts.flnd.541845.1.0.pdf

Size

512,258 bytes

SHA-256

7babeafaafd184398bb592ea09e20e6cea068ec225491e1aa3bee8ba14fcd0ea

Our copy

United_States_v._STANBERRY__flnd_3-26-cr-00052__doc1__gov.uscourts.flnd.541845.1.0.pdf

Original

storage.courtlistener.com