Federal district · prosecutions
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
3 pandemic-relief fraud prosecution records for the Western District of Wisconsin, naming 3 defendants. By program: 2 PPP, 1 EIDL. None has a case page in the archive. An amount is stated for 3 of them, from $147,060 to $406,211. Source dates run from 2021-04-23 to 2024-08-30.
Cases
3 defendants · 0 with a case page · sorted by amount, largest first
| Defendant | Case page | Program | Charge | Amount | Disposition | Sentence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eric Upchurch | PPP | wire fraud, making false statements to the Small Business Administration (SBA), money laundering | $406,211 proceeds received | trial | 28 months | 2024-08-30 | |
| Curtis A. Alleyne | EIDL | wire fraud and money laundering | $149,900 obtained | guilty plea | 13 months | 2024-08-29 | |
| Ahmad Kanan | PPP | Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act fraud and access device fraud | $147,060 PPP loan applications and access device fraud | guilty plea | 42 months | 2021-04-23 |
Data and method
Each row is one row of the pandemic-relief sentences table, printed as that table prints it: defendant, program, charge, amount and its basis, disposition, and the date of the source the row was read from. A blank cell is a blank cell in the table. The sentence column states the months of imprisonment the table records, or the years of probation where it records no custodial term. A case page is linked only where a case page in this district names the defendant; 0 of the 3 rows do. District is the table’s own district field, resolved to this court. Rows whose district field names only a state with more than one federal district are not placed on any district page. A date the table writes in another form is restated as YYYY-MM-DD; a cell that is not a date is printed as it stands. An amount of $1 billion or more is left out: those cells carry a program appropriation quoted in the source release, not a sum attributed to the defendant. Some defendants have more than one row because the table read them from more than one source.