Indictment (2025-03-07)
- Date
- 2025-03-07
Summary
An indictment returned by the January 2025 Grand Jury in United States of America v. Selena Stewart, Tony Queen, and Toby Brazier, CR No. 2:25-cr-00157-DSF, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, filed March 7, 2025 as Document 1. Counts One through Ten charge all three defendants with mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 2(a) and list ten dated mailings of EBP debit cards. The indictment alleges that at least approximately 101 fraudulent Pandemic Unemployment Assistance applications were filed with California's Employment Development Department, causing losses of approximately $1,300,000. Later counts charge Stewart alone under 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2), 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(3). The 13-page document sets out forfeiture allegations under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) and ends "A TRUE BILL".
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 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 1 of 13 Page ID #:1
1
2
3
4
3/07/2025
5
ASI
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10 January 2025 Grand Jury
11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CR No. 2:25-cr-00157-DSF
12 Plaintiff, I N D I C T M E N T
13 v. [18 U.S.C. § 1341: Mail Fraud;
18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2): Use of
14 SELENA STEWART, Unauthorized Access Devices; 18
TONY QUEEN, and U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1): Aggravated
15 TOBY BRAZIER, Identity Theft; 18 U.S.C. §
1029(a)(3): Possession of Fifteen
16 Defendants. or More Access Devices; 18 U.S.C.
§§ 981, 982 and 1029, and 28
17 U.S.C. § 2461(c): Criminal
Forfeiture]
18
19
The Grand Jury charges:
20
COUNTS ONE THROUGH TEN
21
[18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 2(a)]
22
[ALL DEFENDANTS]
23
A. INTRODUCTORY ALLEGATIONS
24
At times relevant to this Indictment:
25
1. California’s Employment Development Department (“EDD”) was
26
the administrator of the unemployment insurance (“UI”) benefits
27
program for the State of California.
28
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 2 of 13 Page ID #:2
1 2. On March 13, 2020, the President of the United States
2 declared COVID-19 an emergency under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
3 Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. As a result, Congress passed
4 the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”),
5 which the President signed into law on March 27, 2020. The CARES Act
6 provided over $2 trillion in economic relief protections to the
7 American people from the public health and economic impacts of COVID-
8 19.
9 3. Before the enactment of the CARES Act, to be eligible for
10 UI benefits administered by EDD, a person had to have been employed
11 and worked in California and received at least a certain amount of
12 wages from an employer in the 18 months preceding his/her UI benefits
13 claim. Because of this requirement, self-employed workers,
14 independent contractors, and employees with insufficient earnings
15 were not eligible to receive regular UI benefits.
16 4. The CARES Act established a new program -- Pandemic
17 Unemployment Assistance (“PUA”) -- to provide UI benefits during the
18 COVID-19 pandemic to people who did not qualify for regular UI
19 benefits, including business owners, self-employed workers,
20 independent contractors, and those with a limited work history, who
21 were out of business or had significantly reduced their services as a
22 direct result of the pandemic. UI benefits provided under the PUA
23 program were sometimes referred to as PUA benefits.
24 5. Under the PUA provisions of the CARES Act, a person who was
25 a business owner, self-employed worker, independent contractor, or
26 gig worker could qualify for PUA benefits if he/she previously
27 performed such work in California and was unemployed, partially
28
2
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 3 of 13 Page ID #:3
1 unemployed, unable to work, or unavailable to work due to a COVID-19-
2 related reason.
3 6. Persons applying for PUA benefits did not need to submit
4 any supporting documents to EDD with their applications. Claimants
5 reported their total income for the 2019 calendar year on the
6 application. The stated income was used to calculate the benefits to
7 be paid, which were at least $167 per week.
8 7. A PUA benefits claimant was required to answer various
9 questions on his/her application to establish his/her eligibility for
10 the benefits. The claimant was required to provide his/her name,
11 Social Security Number, and mailing address. The claimant was also
12 required to identify a qualifying occupational status and COVID-19
13 related reason for being out of work.
14 8. After October 1, 2020, California EDD required UI claimants
15 to verify their identities before a UI claim could be filed online.
16 EDD outsourced the identity verification process to a private vendor
17 called ID.me. To comply, the claimant was required to visit the EDD
18 website and login to their account. The claimant was then prompted
19 to login to an ID.me account or to create a new account. On the
20 ID.me website, claimants were required to submit personally
21 identifiable information –- including their name, date of birth, SSN,
22 email address, and phone number -- for verification. The claimant
23 was also required to upload a copy of a government ID and a live
24 self-taken photograph (or “selfie”) of their face. ID.me used this
25 information (and other data) to verify the claimant’s identity, which
26 was material and essential to the UI application and approval
27 process. Once a claimant’s identity was verified through ID.me, they
28
3
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 4 of 13 Page ID #:4
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 5 of 13 Page ID #:5
1 of other persons, including persons who had not authorized defendants
2 STEWART and QUEEN to file such applications on their behalf or use
3 their names and other identifying information on such applications.
4 c. Defendant STEWART and QUEEN, and their co-schemers,
5 would falsely state and represent, and cause to be falsely stated and
6 represented, on the UI benefits applications that were filed with
7 EDD, that the named claimants were individuals whose employment had
8 been negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, thereby triggering
9 eligibility for UI benefits under the PUA provision of the CARES Act.
10 d. Defendants STEWART and QUEEN, and their co-schemers,
11 would falsely state and represent, and cause to be falsely stated and
12 represented, on the UI benefits applications that were filed with
13 EDD, that the named claimants resided and had worked in the State of
14 California, including in Los Angeles County, within the Central
15 District of California.
16 e. By falsely stating that the named claimants had worked
17 in the State of California, defendants STEWART and QUEEN, and their
18 co-schemers, falsely represented and caused to be falsely represented
19 that the named claimants were eligible for UI benefits administered
20 by EDD when, as defendants STEWART and QUEEN then knew, they were not
21 eligible for such benefits.
22 f. As a result of the fraudulent UI benefits applications
23 that defendants STEWART, QUEEN, and BRAZIER, and their co-schemers,
24 filed and caused to be filed, EDD authorized BofA to issue EBP debit
25 cards in the names of dozens of victims.
26 g. To ensure that they received the UI benefits that were
27 paid as a result of the fraudulent applications, defendants STEWART
28 and QUEEN, and their co-schemers, listed and caused to be listed on
5
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 6 of 13 Page ID #:6
1 the applications for the UI benefits addresses to which they had
2 access as the mailing addresses for each of the victims. Defendants
3 STEWART and QUEEN knew that, by doing so, BofA would mail the EBP
4 debit cards issued in the victims’ names to these addresses, thereby
5 enabling defendants STEWART and QUEEN to take possession of the EBP
6 debit cards.
7 h. After defendants STEWART and QUEEN received the EBP
8 debit cards issued as a result of the fraudulent UI benefits
9 applications that they and their co-schemers submitted to EDD,
10 defendants STEWART and QUEEN, and their co-schemers, used the debit
11 cards and caused the debit cards to be used to withdraw the UI
12 benefits loaded onto the debit cards by making cash withdrawals at
13 Automated Teller Machines and at banking centers.
14 12. Through this scheme, defendants STEWART, QUEEN, and
15 BRAZIER, and their co-schemers, caused at least approximately 101
16 fraudulent applications for PUA benefits to be filed with EDD
17 resulting in losses to EDD and the United States Treasury of
18 approximately $1,300,000.
19 C. USE OF THE MAILS
20 13. On or about the dates set forth below, in Los Angeles
21 County, within the Central District of California, and elsewhere,
22 defendants STEWART, QUEEN, and BRAZIER, together with others known
23 and unknown to the Grand Jury, each aiding and abetting the other,
24 for the purpose of executing the above-described scheme to defraud,
25 knowingly caused the following items to be delivered by the United
26 States Postal Service according to the directions thereon:
27
28
6
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 7 of 13 Page ID #:7
1
COUNT DATE ITEM MAILED
2
ONE 5/19/20 EBP debit card ending in -1492 in the name
3 of victim J.P. that was mailed by BofA to an
apartment in Wilmington, California
4
TWO 5/29/20 EBP debit card ending in -3984 in the name
5 of K.M. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Inglewood, California
6
THREE 6/3/20 EBP debit card ending in -4825 in the name
7 of victim D.B. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Santa Monica, California
8
FOUR 7/19/20 EBP debit card ending in -3722 in the name
9 of victim J.Q. that was mailed by BofA to an
apartment in Wilmington, California
10
FIVE 7/23/20 EBP debit card ending in -6193 in the name
11 of C.J. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in San Marino, California
12
SIX 7/30/20 EBP debit card ending in -0067 in the name
13 of S.T. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Harbor City, California
14
SEVEN 8/19/20 EBP debit card ending in -0159 in the name
15 of victim C.T. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Santa Monica, California
16
EIGHT 8/20/20 EBP debit card ending in -2370 in the name
17 of victim K.M. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Inglewood, California
18
NINE 8/20/20 EBP debit card ending in -8847 in the name
19 of victim S.R. that was mailed by BofA to an
address in Inglewood, California
20
TEN 9/06/20 EBP debit card ending in -8444 in the name
21 of victim M.H. that was mailed by BofA to an
apartment in Wilmington, California
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 8 of 13 Page ID #:8
1 COUNT ELEVEN
2 [18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2)]
3 [DEFENDANT STEWART]
4 14. Beginning on or about March 2020, and continuing through on
5 or about December 6, 2020, in Los Angeles County, within the Central
6 District of California, and elsewhere, defendant SELENA STEWART, in
7 transactions affecting interstate and foreign commerce, knowingly and
8 with intent to defraud, used unauthorized access devices, as defined
9 in Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1029(e)(1) and (3),
10 specifically, the following debit card account numbers issued in the
11 names of the persons identified below, which debit card account
12 numbers were obtained with intent to defraud, and by such conduct
13 obtained things of value, their value together totaling $1,000 or
14 more:
15
16
UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS DEVICE ISSUED TO
17
BofA account number ending in -8444 M.H.
18
BofA account number ending in -2370 K.M
19
BofA account number ending in -8847 S.T.
20
BofA account number ending in -6193 C.J.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 9 of 13 Page ID #:9
1 COUNTS TWELVE AND THIRTEEN
2 [18 U.S.C. §§ 1028A(a)(1), 2(a), 2(b)]
3 [DEFENDANT STEWART]
4 On or about the dates set forth below, in Los Angeles County,
5 within the Central District of California, and elsewhere, defendant
6 SELENA STEWART, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, each
7 aiding and abetting the other, knowingly used, and willfully caused
8 to be used, without lawful authority, the means of identification set
9 forth below that defendant STEWART knew belonged to another person,
10 during and in relation to the commission of the following felony
11 offenses:
12
13
COUNT DATE MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION FELONY VIOLATION
14
TWELVE 8/20/20 Name and Social COUNT EIGHT
15 Security Number of K.M.
16 THIRTEEN 9/6/20 Name and Social COUNT TEN
Security Number of M.H.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 10 of 13 Page ID #:10
1 COUNT FOURTEEN
2 [18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(3)]
3 [DEFENDANT STEWART]
4 Beginning on or about May 27, 2020, and continuing through on or
5 about December 10, 2020 in Los Angeles County, within the Central
6 District of California, defendant SELENA STEWART knowingly and with
7 intent to defraud, possessed at least fifteen unauthorized access
8 devices (as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Sections
9 1029(e)(1) and (3)), namely, approximately 30 Electronic Benefit
10 Transfer (“EBT”) account numbers, all issued to persons other than
11 defendant STEWART, with said possession affecting interstate and
12 foreign commerce.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 11 of 13 Page ID #:11
1 FORFEITURE ALLEGATION ONE
2 [18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c)]
3 1. Pursuant to Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
4 Procedure, notice is hereby given that the United States of America
5 will seek forfeiture as part of any sentence, pursuant to Title 18,
6 United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and Title 28, United States
7 Code, Section 2461(c), in the event of the defendant’s conviction of
8 the offenses set forth in any of Counts One through Ten and Twelve
9 through Thirteen of this Indictment.
10 2. The defendant, if so convicted, shall forfeit to the United
11 States of America the following:
12 (a) All right, title, and interest in any and all
13 property, real or personal, constituting, or derived from, any
14 proceeds traceable to any of the offenses; and
15 (b) To the extent such property is not available for
16 forfeiture, a sum of money equal to the total value of the property
17 described in subparagraph (a).
18 3. Pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p),
19 as incorporated by Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), the
20 defendant, if so convicted, shall forfeit substitute property, up to
21 the value of the property described in the preceding paragraph if, as
22 the result of any act or omission of the defendant, the property
23 described in the preceding paragraph or any portion thereof (a)
24 cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence; (b) has been
25 transferred, sold to, or deposited with a third party; (c) has been
26 placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court; (d) has been
27 substantially diminished in value; or (e) has been commingled with
28 other property that cannot be divided without difficulty.
11
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 12 of 13 Page ID #:12
1 FORFEITURE ALLEGATION TWO
2 [18 U.S.C. §§ 982 and 1029]
3 1. Pursuant to Rule 32.2(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal
4 Procedure, notice is hereby given that the United States will seek
5 forfeiture as part of any sentence, pursuant to Title 18, United
6 States Code, Sections 982(a)(2) and 1029, in the event of the
7 defendant’s conviction of the offenses set forth in any of Counts
8 Eleven and Fourteen of this Indictment.
9 2. The defendant, if so convicted, shall forfeit to the United
10 States of America the following:
11 (a) All right, title, and interest in any and all
12 property, real or personal, constituting, or derived from, any
13 proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of the
14 offense;
15 (b) Any personal property used or intended to be used to
16 commit the offense; and
17 (c) To the extent such property is not available for
18 forfeiture, a sum of money equal to the total value of the property
19 described in subparagraphs (a) and (b).
20 3. Pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p),
21 as incorporated by Title 18, United States Code, Sections 982(b)(1)
22 and 1029(c)(2), the defendant, if so convicted, shall forfeit
23 substitute property, up to the total value of the property described
24 in the preceding paragraph if, as the result of any act or omission
25 of the defendant, the property described in the preceding paragraph,
26 or any portion thereof: (a) cannot be located upon the exercise of
27 due diligence; (b) has been transferred, sold to or deposited with a
28 third party; (c) has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the
12
Case 2:25-cr-00157-DSF Document 1 Filed 03/07/25 Page 13 of 13 Page ID #:13
1 court; (d) has been substantially diminished in value; or (e) has
2 been commingled with other property that cannot be divided without
3 difficulty.
4
5 A TRUE BILL
6
7 /S/
Foreperson
8
9 JOSEPH T. MCNALLY
Acting United States Attorney
10
LINDSEY GREER DOTSON
11 Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
12
13
14 FRANCES S. LEWIS
Assistant United States Attorney
15 Chief, General Crimes Section
16 BENEDETTO L. BALDING
Assistant United States Attorney
17 Corporate and Securities Fraud
Strike Force
18
CLIFFORD D. MPARE
19 Assistant United States Attorney
General Crimes Section
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cacd.962754.1.0.pdf
- Size
- 1,496,804 bytes
- SHA-256
- e217b5686475acd3ce8e7e43ff406f018687b189b896c926cd5ae705333d0342
- Our copy
- gov.uscourts.cacd.962754.1.0.pdf
- Original
- www.courtlistener.com