Guilty Plea Agreement — United States v. Ashley Luckett

Summary

A Guilty Plea Agreement filed June 12, 2024 as Doc. 94 in United States of America versus Ashley Luckett, Case 4:23-cr-00350, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Luckett agrees to plead guilty to Count 1, conspiracy under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349, and the United States agrees to dismiss Counts 3 and 6 at sentencing. The agreed facts state that Luckett, Shonta Woods and Shanay Bolden submitted fraudulent rental assistance applications to the Missouri Housing Development Commission, which wired a total of $20,400.00 to Luckett. They also state that on March 30, 2021, Luckett caused a fraudulent PPP loan application for a catering company named "Checking" to be submitted to Capital Plus Financial, LLC, which wired $20,107.00. The parties estimate a total offense level of 14.

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

Cite this document

“Guilty Plea Agreement — United States v. Ashley Luckett.” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/94-plea-agreement-guidelines-rec-stip-30b9938a14/, SHA-256 040d613cfb0c8877ce292b4753198a9ce19913d76b4a07f5c61cd88c4cd5ecb7.

Full text

Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 1 of 14 PageID #:
191

UNITEDSTATESDIBTRICTCOURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DMSION

• UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 4:23-cr-00350-RLW
)
ASHLEY LUCKET, )
)
Defendant. )

GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT
Come now the parties and hereby agree, as follows:

1. PARTIES:

The parties are the defendant Ashley Luckett, represented by defense counsel Phil

Eisenhauer, and the United States of America (hereinafter "United States" or "Government"),

represented by the Office of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri. This

agreement does not, and is not intended to, bind any govemniental office or agency other than the

United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri. The Court is neither a party to nor

bound by this agreement.

2. GUILTY PLEA:
Pursuant to Rule l l(c)(l)(A), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, in exchange for the

defendant's voluntary plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment, the United States agrees to

dismiss at the time of sentencing Counts 3 and 6 of the Indictment In addition, the United States

agrees that no further federal prosecution will be brought in this District relative to the defendant's

wire fraud scheme and conspiracy described in the Indictment, of which the Government is aware

1
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 2 of 14 PageID #:
192

at this time. In addition, the parties agree that the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Total Offense Level

analysis agreed to by the parties herein is the result of negotiation and led, in part, to the guilty

plea The parties further agree that the United· States will request a sentence within the U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines range (combination of Total Offense Level and Criminal History Category)

ultimately determined by the Court pursuant to any chapter of the Guidelines and Title 18, United

States Code, Section 3553(a). The parties further agree that Defendant may request a sentence -

above or below the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range (combination of Total Offense Level and

Criminal History Category) ultimately determined by the Court pursuant to any chapter of the

Guidelines, Title 18, United States Code, Section 3553, or any other provision or rule oflaw not

addressed herein.

3. ELEMENTS:

As to Count 1, the defendant admits to knowingly violating Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1349, and admits there is a factual basis for the plea and further fully understands that the

elements of the crime are:

. One, two or more persons, including Defendant, reached an agreement or came to an

understanding to devise, make up, or participate in a scheme to commit wire fraud;

Two, Defendant voluntarily and intentionally joined in the agreement or understanding,

either at the time it was first reached or at some later time while it was still in effect; and

Three, at the time Defendants joined in the agreement or understanding, Defendant knew

the purpose of the agreement or understanding.

2
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 3 of 14 PageID #:
193

4. FACTS:

The parties agree that the facts in this case are as follows and that the Government would

prove these facts beyond a reasonable doubt if the case were to go to trial. These facts may be

considered as relevant conduct pursuant to Section 181 .3:

Beginning by at least March 1, 2020, and continuing through at least April 30, 2023, in the

Eastern District of Missouri, and elsewhere, Defendants Ashley Luckett. Shonta Woods, and

Shanay Bolden voluntarily and intentionally conspired to commit wire fraud-specifically to

execute a scheme and artifice to defraud and obtain money by means of materially false and

fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises to obtain pandemic assistance dollars :from the

Missouri Housing Development Commission and third-party participating lenders in the Paycheck

Protection Program.

Defendants Bolden, Woods, Luckett-within the Eastern District of Missouri-submitted

or caused to be submitted to the MHDC fraudulent applications fqr rental assistance under the

Missouri State Assistance for Housing Relief Program ("SAFHR") program. Those fraudulent

SAFIIR applications all included the same material misrepresentation: that the defendant who was

applying for rental assistance served as the landlord for the tenant listed in the application. In truth

and fact, however, Bolden, Woods, Luckett did not serve as the landlords for any tenants, much

less as the landlords for the specific tenants listed in their fraudulent applications.

For the at least two fraudulent SAFHR applications caused to be submitted by Luckett

within the Eastern District of Missouri, she falsely represented that she was the landlord for the

specific tenants included in those applications. In both of those applications - in which Luckett

falsely held herself out to be a landlord - she included her home address, cellphone number, email

3
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 4 of 14 PageID #:
194

address, and her Navy Federal Credit Union account number (ending in 6315). She also included

the name of the purported tenants (i.e., their means of identification), which was used to generate

MHDC numbers for the MHDC grant files. In response to Luckett's fraudulent MHDC

applications - and based on Luckett's material misrepresentations within those applications -

the MHDC wired a total of $20,400.00 to Luckett's Navy Federal Credit Union bank account

(account number ending in 6315).

For the at least eight fraudulent SAFIIR applications caused to be submitted by Defendant

Shanay Bolden, she falsely represented that she was the landlord for the specific tenants included

in those applications. In each of those applications - in which Bolden falsely held herself out to

be a landlord - she included her home address, cellphone number, email address, and her Navy

Federal Credit Union account number (ending in 0049). Bolden paid Defendant Shonta Woods to

electronically submit Holden's fraudulent SAFHR applications to the MHDC. In response to

Bolden's fraudulent SAFIIR applications - and based on Bolden's material misrepresentations

within those applications - the MHDC wired a total of $126,500.00 to Bolden's Navy Federal

Credit Union account (account number ending in 0049). In addition to paying Woods for

submitting the fraudulent applications and paying kickbacks to her purported tenants, Bolden spent

the proceeds of her fraud on personal items, including purchases that she made at Saks Fifth

Avenue. Along with other fictitious tenants, Defendant Bolden falsely and fraudulently

represented to the MHDC that she served as the landlord for Defendant Ashley Luckett (Bolden' s

purported tenant). In truth and fact, however, Bolden did not serve as the landlord for Luckett.

After receiving money from the MHDC through fraud, Bolden sent $10,000 of the proceeds to

Luckett.

4
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 5 of 14 PageID #:
195

Defendant Shonta Woods submitted fraudulent SAFHR applications on behalf of Bolden,

Luckett, herself, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury. In exchange for Woods

submitting their fraudulent SAFHR applications, Bolden, Luckett, and others, paid Woods tens of

thousands of dollars.

It was further part of the conspiracy and scheme and artifice to defraud that Luckett caused

to be submitted (within the Eastern District of Missouri) a fraudulent PPP loan application to

Capital Plus Financial, LLC for a catering company named "Checking'' on March 30, 2021.

Luckett's fraudulent PPP loan application included numerous materially false and fraudulent

representations. Among other things, Luckett's fraudulent PPP loan application included the

materially false statement that the catering company called Checking had an annual gross income

of $96,527.00. In truth and fact, however, Luckett did not own a catering company at all. Based

on the material misrepresentations included in Luckett's fraudulent PPP loan application, Capital

Plus Financial, LLC completed an interstate wire transfer of $20,107.00 to Luckett's Great

Southern Bank account (account number ending in 8399).

The parties concede that Defendant's PPP loan and MHDC payments were benefits

authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with a major

disaster declaration under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency

Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170) or an emergency declaration under section 501 of the Robert T.

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5191), under Title 18, United

States Code, Section 1040.

5
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 6 of 14 PageID #:
196

5. STATUTORY PENALTIES:

The defendant fully understands that the maximum possible penalty provided by law for

the crime to which the defendant is pleading guilty is imprisonment of not more than 20 years, a

fine ofnot more than $250,000, or both such imprisonment and fine. The Court may also impose

a period of supervised release of not more than 3 years.

6. U.S. SENTENCING GUIDELINES: 2023 MANUAL:

The defendant understands that this offense is affected by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

and the actual sentencing range is determined by both the Total Offense Level and the Criminal

History Category. The parties agree that the following are the applicable U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines Total Offense Level provisions.

a. Chapter 2 Offense Conduct:

(1) Base Offense Level: As to Count l, the parties agree that the base offense level is 7,

as found in Section 2Bl.l(a)(l).

(2) Specific Offense Characteristics: The parties agree that the. following Specific

Offense Characteristics apply as to Count 1:

The parties agree that 6 levels should be added pursuant to Section 2B 1. l(b)(1 )(G) because

the loss exceeds $40,000, but does not exceed $95,000.

The parties agree that 2 levels should be added pursuant to Section 2Bl.l(b)(ll)(C)(i)

because the offense involved Defendant's unauthorized use of her purported means of

identification on a fraudulent application for rental assistance to obtain any other means of

identification (account number created in connection with application).

6
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 7 of 14 PageID #:
197

The parties agree that 2 levels should be added pursuant to Section 2Bl.l(b)(12) because

the offense involved conduct described in 18 U.S.C. § 1040.

b. Chapter 3 Adiustments:

(1) Acceptance of Responsibility: The parties agree that three levels should be

deducted pursuant to Section 3El.l(a) and (b), because the defendant has clearly demonstrated

acceptance ofresponsibility. The parties agree that the defendant's eligibility for this deduction is

based upon information presently known. If subsequent to the taking of the guilty plea the

Government receives new evidence of statements or conduct by the defendant which it believes

are inconsistent with defendant's eligibility for this deduction, the Government may present said

evidence to the court, and argue that the defendant should not receive all or part of the deduction

pursuant to Section 3El.1, without violating the plea agreement.

c. Other Adjustments: The parties have no :further agreement regarding any other

adjustments.

d. Estimated Total Offense Level: The parties estimate that the total offense level is 14.

If the presentence investigation report determines a different total offense level, the parties are

permitted to object to or accept any enhancements or reductions in the presentence investigation

report.

e. Criminal Histon: The determination of the defendant's Criminal History Category

shall be left to the Court. Either party may challenge, before and at sentencing, the finding of the

Presentence Report as to the defendant's criminal history and the applicable category. The

• defendant's criminal history is known to the defendant and is substantially available in the Pretrial

Services Report.

7
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 8 of 14 PageID #:
198

f. Effect of Parties' U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Analysis: The parties agree that the

Court is not bowid by the Guidelines analysis agreed to herein. The parties may not have foreseen

all applicable Guidelines. The Court may, in its discretion, apply or not apply any Guideline despite

the agreement herein and the parties shall not be permitted to withdraw from the plea agreement

The Government recognizes it is bound by the specific agreements made above but reserves the

right to answer any questions the U.S. Probation Office or the Court might have related to

sentencing or present evidence at the Court's request.

7. WAIVER OF APPEAL AND POST-CONVICTION RIGHTS:

a. Appeal: The defendant has been fully apprised by defense counsel of the defendant's

rights concerning appeal and fully understands the right to appeal the sentence under Title 18,

United States Code, Section 3742.

(1) Non-Sentencing hsues: The parties waive all rights to appeal all non-

jurisdictional, non-sentencing issues, including, but not limited to, any issues relating to pretrial

motions, discovery, the guilty plea, the constitutionality of the statute(s) to which defendant is

pleading gwlty and whether defendant's conduct falls within the scope of the statute(s).

(2) Sentencing Issues: In the event the Court accepts the plea, accepts the U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines Total Offense Level agreed to herein, and, after determining the applicable

Sentencing Guidelines range, sentences the defendant within or below that range, then, as part of

this agreement, the defendant hereby waives all rights to appeal all sentencing issues other than

Criminal History, but only if it affects the Base Offense Level or Criminal History Category.

Similarly, the Government hereby waives all rights to appeal all sentencing issues other than

8
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 9 of 14 PageID #:
199

Criminal History, provided the Court accepts the plea, the agreed Total Offense Level and

sentences the defendant within or above that range.

8. OTHER:

a. Disclosures Required by the United States Probation Office: The defendant agrees

to truthfully complete and sign forms as required by the United States Probation Offi~e prior to

sentencing and consents to the release of these forms and any supporting documentation by the

United States Probation Office to the Government

b. Supervised Release: Pursuant to any supervised release term, the Court will impose

standard conditions upon the defendant and may impose special conditions related to the crime

defendant committed. These conditions will be restrictions on the defendant to which the

defendant will be required to adhere. Violation of the conditions of supervised release resulting

in revocation may require the defendant to serve a term of imprisonment equal to the length of the

term of supervised release, but not greater than the term set forth in Title 18, United States Code,

Section 3583(e)(3), without credit for the time served after release. The defendant understands

that parole has been abolished.

c. Mandatory Special Assessment: Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section

3013, the Court is required to impose a mandatory special assessment of$ I 00 per count for a total

of $100, which the defendant agrees to pay at the time of sentenc~g. Money paid by the defendant

toward any restitution or fine imposed by the Court shall be first used to pay any unpaid mandatory

special assessment.

d. Possibility of Detention: The defendant may be subject to immediate detention

pursuant to the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3143.

9
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 10 of 14 PageID #:
200

e. Fines, Restitution and Costs of Incarceration and Supervision: The Court may

impose a fine, restitution (in addition to any penalty authorized by law), costs of incarceration and

costs of sup~ion. The defendant agrees that any fine or restitution imposed by the Court will

be due and payable immediately. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3663A, an

order of restitution is mandatory for all crimes listed in Section 3663A(c). Regardless of the Count

of conviction, the amount of mandatory restitution imposed shall include all amounts allowed by

Section 3663A(b) and the amount of loss agreed to by the parties, including all relevant conduct

loss. The defendant agrees to provide full restitution to all victims of all charges in the Indictment

f. Forfeiture: The defendant agrees to the forfeiture set forth in the Forfeiture Allegation

in the Indictment to which the Defendant is pleading guilty. This agreement includes any items

that were seized by law enforcement officials during the course of this investigation. The

Defendant also agrees to the entry of a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of restitution

determined by the court at sentencing. The Defendant further agrees that the proffer of evidence

supporting this guilty plea is sufficient evidence to support such forfeiture.

The Defendant agrees that the Court may enter a consent preliminary order of forfeiture at

the time of his guilty plea or at any time before sentencing. The Defendant further agrees that this

order will become final as to the Defendant when it is issued and will be part of his sentence

pursuant to Fed. R Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(A).

The Defendant agrees that the Government may choose in its sole discretion how it wishes

to accomplish forfeiture, whether by criminal or civil forfeiture, using judicial or non-judicial

forfeiture processes. The Defendant waives all rights to assert any interest in the forfeited property

10
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 11 of 14 PageID #:
201

in the future, and will withdraw any prior claims made to forfeited property, whether they were

made in a judicial or non--judicial forfeiture process.

The Defendant agrees (i) to assist the Government in identifying all property that is subject

to forfeiture, (ii) to take any and all actions necessary to transfer title and ownership of said

property to the Government, and (iii) to help the Government to rebut the claims of nominees

and/or alleged third party owners, including by testifying truthfully in any judicial. forfeiture

proceeding.

The Defendant knowingly and intelligently waives all constitutional and statutory

challenges in any manner to any forfeiture carried out in accordance with this plea agreement on

any grounds, including that the forfeiture constitutes an excessive fine or punishment. The

Defendant further knowingly and intelligently waives any rights the Defendant may have (i) for

notice of the forfeiture to be given in the charging instrument, (ii) for a jury or the Court to

determine what property is subject to forfeiture, (iii) for the Court to explain the forfeiture at the

Defendant's change of plea hearing, and (iv) for the forfeiture to be made part of the oral

pronouncement of sentence and included in the judgment.

9. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND WAIVER OF THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS:

In pleading guilty, the defendant acknowledges, fully understands and hereby waives her

rights, including but not limited to: the right to plead not guilty to the charges; the right to be tried

by a jury in a public and speedy trial; the right to file pretrial motions, including motions to

suppress or exclude evidence; the right at such trial to a presumption of innocence; the right to

require the Government to prove the elements of the offenses against the defendant beyond a

reasonable doubt; the right not to testify; the right not to present any evidence; the right to be

11
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 12 of 14 PageID #:
202

protected from compelled self-incrimination; the right at trial to confront and cross-examine

adverse witnesses; the right to testify and present evidence and the right to compel the attendance

of witnesses. The defendant further understands that by this guilty plea, the defendant expressly

waives all the rights set forth in this paragraph.

The defendant fully understands. that the defendant has the right to be represented by

counsel, and if necessary, to have the Court appoint counsel at trial and at every other stage of the

proceeding. The defendant's counsel has explained these rights and the consequences of the

waiver of these rights. The defendant fully understands that, as a result of the guilty plea, no trial

will, in fact, occur and that the only action remaining to be taken in this case is the imposition of

the sentence.

The defendant is fully satisfied with the representation received from defense counsel. The

defendant has reviewed the Government's evidence and discussed the Government's case and all

possible defenses and defense witnesses with defense counsel. Defense counsel has completely

and satisfactorily explored all areas which the defendant has requested relative to the

Government's case and any defenses.

The guilty plea could impact defendant's immigration status or result in deportation. In

particular, if any crime to which defendant is pleading guilty is an "aggravated felony'' as defined

by Title 8, United States Code, Section l 10l(a)(43), removal or deportation is presumed

mandatory. Defense counsel has advised the defendant of the possible immigration consequences,

including deportation, resulting from the plea.

12
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 13 of 14 PageID #:
203

10. VOLUNTARY NATURE OF THE GUil..TY PLEA AND PLEA AGREEMENT:

This docwnent constitutes the entire agreement between the defendant and the

Government, and no other promises or inducements have been made, directly or indirectly, by any

agent of the Government, including any Department of Justice attorney, concerning any plea to be

entered in this case. In addition, the defendant states that no person has, directly or indirectly,_

threatened or coerced the defendant to do or refrain from doing anything in connection with any

aspect of this case, including entering a plea of guilty.

The defendant acknowledges having voluntarily entered into both the plea agreement and

the guilty plea. The defendant further acknowledges that this guilty plea is made of the defendant's

own free will and that the defendant is, in fact, guilty.

11. CONSEQUENCES OF POST-PLEA MISCONDUCT:

After pleading guilty and before sentencing, if defendant commits any crime, other than

minor traffic offenses, violates any condition of release that results in revocation, violates any term

of this guilty plea agreement, intentionally provides misleading, incomplete or untruthful

information to the U.S. Probation Office or fails to appear for sentencing, the United States, at its

option, may be released from its obligations under this agreement. The Government may also, in

its discretion, proceed with this agreement and may advocate for any sentencing position supported

by the facts, including but not limited to obstruction of justice and denial of acceptance of

responsibility.

12. NO RIGHT TO WITHDRAW GUILTY PLEA:

Pursuant to Rule l l(c) and (d), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the defendant

understands that there will be no right to withdraw the plea entered under this agreement, except

13
Case: 4:23-cr-00350-HEA Doc. #: 94 Filed: 06/12/24 Page: 14 of 14 PageID #:
204

where the Court rejects those portions of the plea agreement which deal with charges the

Government agrees to dismiss or not to bring.

5/14/2024
Date Derek Wiseman
Assistant United States Attorney

~wutl
Aseyuckett
De t

dil~~
Phil Eisenhauer
Attorney for Defendant

File and source

File: 94-plea-agreement-guidelines-rec-stip.pdf
Size: 316,685 bytes
SHA-256: 040d613cfb0c8877ce292b4753198a9ce19913d76b4a07f5c61cd88c4cd5ecb7
Our copy: 94-plea-agreement-guidelines-rec-stip.pdf
Original: No public link identified.