Bill of Indictment — United States v. Spenc'r Denard Rickerson (Document 3)

Summary

A Bill of Indictment filed 03/15/22 as Document 3 in United States v. Spenc'r Denard Rickerson, Docket No. 5:22-cr-13-KDB, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Statesville Division. The grand jury charges violations of 18 U.S.C. 2113(d) and 18 U.S.C. 1343. It alleges that Rickerson, while unemployed and receiving unemployment benefits, used false information to apply for a PPP loan and several EIDL loans between June 30, 2020 and March 20, 2021, obtaining about $20,833 from the PPP loan and about $53,400 from one EIDL loan. It alleges an armed robbery of a bank in Newton, North Carolina on or about March 18, 2021. The indictment lists the loan applications and includes a notice of forfeiture with a money judgment of $52,477 for Count Two.

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

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

FILED
CHARLOTTE, NC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA MAR 15 2022
STATESVILLE DIVISION

US DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) DOCKET NO, 5:22-cr-13-KDB
)

v. ) BILL OF INDICTMENT
)
) Violation:

SPENC’R DENARD RICKERSON ) 18 U.S.C. § 2113(d)

a/k/a Spencr Rickerson ) 18 U.S.C. § 1343

)
)

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:
At the specified times and at all relevant times:

Introduction

1, By approximately March 2020, Defendant SPENC’R DENARD RICKERSON, a
resident of Claremont, North Carolina, was unemployed and receiving unemployment benefits
from the state of North Carolina. RICKERSON turned to illegal means to obtain additional
funds. Between June 30, 2020, and March 20, 2021, RICKERSON used false information to
apply for a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan and various Economic Injury Disaster
(EIDL) loans. RICKERSON obtained approximately $20,833 in fraudulent funds from the PPP
loan and obtained approximately $53,400 in fraudulent funds from one of his EIDL loans. On or
about March 18, 2021, RICKERSON committed an armed robbery of a BB&T Bank located in
Newton, North Carolina. RICKERSON used the stolen funds from the fraudulent EIDL loan
and bank robbery to pay bills and to buy cryptocurrency.

Background

2. From at least March 2018 and continuing until February 2020, RICKERSON
was a resident of Mooresville and Claremont, North Carolina and a full-time employee of
Company A located in Mooresville, North Carolina.

3, On or about February 19, 2020, RICKERSON was placed on a leave of absence
by Company A.

4, In or about March 2020, RICKERSON applied for unemployment benefits from
the North Carolina Department of Commerce. RICKERSON received unemployment benefits
between June 2020 and November 2020 and again between approximately March 2021 and
August 2021, and RICKERSON made various representations regarding his employment to the
Department of Commerce, including:

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 1 of 7
a. In his initial application in March 2020, RICKERSON answered “No”
when asked if he was currently self-employed;

b. In his subsequent application in March 2021, RICKERSON answered
“No” when asked if he was currently self-employed;

C. On or about 4/18/2020, 5/16/2020, and 6/13/2020, RICKERSON
answered “No” when asked if he was self-employed.

d. Between approximately July 2020 and November 2020 and again
between approximately March 2021 and August 2021, RICKERSON made weekly and
monthly assertions that he had earned “$0” or nothing in odd jobs or other employment.

The CARES Act, EIDL Loans, and PPP Loans

5. On March 13, 2020, President Donald J. Trump declared an emergency under
Section 501(b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in
response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). On March 27, 2020, the President signed into
law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act, which was designed to
provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans suffering the economic
effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act established several new temporary
programs and provided for the expansion of others, including programs created and/or
administered by the Small Business Administration (SBA), to administer the emergency relief.

6. One of the programs expanded by the CARES Act was the EIDL program, which
was an SBA program that provides low-interest financing to small businesses, renters, and
homeowners in regions affected by declared disasters.

a, EIDL proceeds could only be used for working capital to alleviate
economic injury caused by the disaster (related to the COVID-19 pandemic) occurring in
the month of January 2020, and continuing thereafter.

b. EIDL funds were issued directly from the United States Treasury, and an
applicant applied through the SBA via an online portal. In the electronic application, the
applicant certified that all of the information in the application was true and correct to the
best of the applicant’s knowledge and was warned that any false statement or
misrepresentation to the SBA or any misapplication of loan proceeds may result in
sanctions, including criminal penalties. The application also stated that the SBA relies
upon the self-certifications in the EIDL application in determining whether the applicant
was eligible for an EIDL.

om The EIDL application process collected information concerning the
business and the business owner, including information regarding the business’ gross
revenue for the 12-month period preceding the disaster, which for COVID-19 was

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 2 of 7
defined as January 31, 2020; the cost of goods sold for the 12-month period preceding the
disaster; the number of employees employed by the business at the time of the disaster;
information as to the criminal history of the business owners; and information regarding
anyone that assisted in the preparation of the application.

7. Another source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of
forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a
program referred to as the PPP.

a, In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business submitted a PPP loan
application, which was signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP
loan application required the business (through its authorized representative) to
acknowledge the program rules and make certain affirmative certifications to be eligible
to obtain the PPP loan. In the PPP loan application (SBA Form 2483), the small business
(through its authorized representative) was required to provide, 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.

b. A PPP loan application was processed by a participating lender. If a PPP
loan application was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP loan using its own
monies. While the lender issued the PPP loan, the SBA provided a guarantee that the
financial institution would be reimbursed. Data from the application, including
information about the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of
employees, was transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the course of processing the loan.

c, PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain
permissible expenses such as payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The
PPP allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the
business spent the loan proceeds on these expenses within a designated period of time
and used a defined portion of the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

EIDL Loans Submitted by RICKERSON

8. On or about June 30, 2020, RICKERSON submitted and caused to be submitted
EIDL Application *9875 to the SBA via an online submission. In the application, RICKERSON
falsely claimed: (1) to own a business with 15 employees; (2) that the business was involved in
“Business Services”; (3) that the business had been established in 2019; and (4) that the
business had grossed $107,000 in revenue in the previous 12 months. RICKERSON falsely
answered “No” to a question regarding whether he was presently subject to an Indictment,
Arraignment, or other formal charges. RICKERSON provided bank account information for his
personal bank account ending in *6239 at Wells Fargo bank.

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 3 of 7
9, As part of EIDL Application *9875 to the SBA, RICKERSON requested an
advance of up to $10,000.

10. RICKERSON certified under penalty of perjury that the information in EIDL
Application *9875 was correct.

11. Upon receipt of EIDL Application *9875, the SBA approved the advance. On or
about July 2, 2020, the SBA disbursed $10,000 to RICKERSON’s Wells Fargo Account *6293.

12. |The SBA subsequently approved RICKERSON’s EIDL Application. On or about
July 6, 2020, the SBA disbursed an additional $43,400 to RICKERSON’s Wells Fargo Account
*6293.

13. Between July 2, 2020, and September 17, 2020, RICKERSON spent the vast
majority of the funds obtained from the SBA, generally on purchases of cryptocurrency and on
cash withdrawals.

14. On or about the dates below, RICKERSON submitted and caused to be
submitted additional loan applications to the Small Business Administration (SBA) for the
EIDL loans described in the chart below. However, the SBA did not issue these loans:

a. 1/6/2021 | Submission of application ending in *0209 to the SBA for
an EIDL loan for a business in his own name with the
purported business activity of “Personal Services”

b. 1/11/2021 | Submission of application ending in *5428 to the SBA for
an EIDL loan for a business in his own name with the
purported business activity of “Miscellaneous Services”

C. 1/14/2021 | Submission of application ending in *1930 to the SBA for
an EIDL loan for a business in his own name in the
purported industry of “Personal Services”

PPP Loan Submitted by RICKERSON

15. Cross River Bank was a financial institution whose deposits were insured by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). Cross River Bank was headquartered in Fort
Lee, New Jersey. Cross River Bank participated in the SBA’s PPP as a lender and, as such, was
authorized to lend funds to eligible borrowers under the terms of the PPP.

16. On or about March 20, 2021, RICKERSON submitted and caused to be
submitted a Lender Application Form, application *2985, for a PPP loan to Cross River Bank.
In the application, RICKERSON requested $20,833 to pay payroll costs and utilities of a
business in his own name that was purportedly in the business of “New Single-Family Housing
Construction.”

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 4 of 7
17, In this application, RICKERSON falsely claimed to own a single-family housing
construction business, with one employee, and that the business had existed for more than two
years. RICKERSON said that he would use $1 to pay company utilities and that he would use
$20,832 for Payroll Costs.

18. RICKERSON’s application for the PPP Loan from Cross River Bank resulted in
Loan *86-06 being created and $20,833 being disbursed to RICKERSON to his Wells Fargo

Account *6293,
COUNT ONE
(Bank Robbery ~ 18 U.S.C. § 2113)

19, On or about March 18, 2021, in Catawba County, within the Western District of
North Carolina, the Defendant,

SPENC’R DENARD RICKERSON
a/k/a SPENCR RICKERSON

by force, violence and intimidation did take from the person or presence of another, a sum of
money belonging to and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of BB&T
Bank, located at 12 North Main Avenue, Newton, North Carolina, a bank whose deposits were
then insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and in doing so did assault and put
in jeopardy the life of another person by the use of a dangerous weapon, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Sections 2113(a) and 2113(d).

COUNT TWO
(Wire Fraud Scheme — 18 U.S.C. § 1343)

20. Paragraphs | through 18 of this Bill of Indictment are re-alleged and
incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth herein.

21. Beginning in or around June 2020 and continuing through in or around at least
April 2021, in Catawba County in the Western District of North Carolina and elsewhere, the
Defendant,

SPENC’R DENARD RICKERSON
a/k/a SPENCR RICKERSON

with the intent to defraud, having knowingly devised and intended to devise a scheme and
artifice to defraud, and to obtain money by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,
representations, and promises, did knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted, by means of
wire communications in interstate commerce, writings, signals, pictures, and sounds for the
purpose of executing such scheme and artifice, fo wit, electronic loan applications, wire transfers,
and other electronic transactions in interstate and foreign commerce.

22. The purpose of the scheme to defraud was for RICKERSON to unjustly

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 5 of 7
enrich himself by submitting and causing to be submitted fraudulent EIDL and PPP loan
applications for fictitious businesses.

23. The manner and means by which RICKERSON sought to accomplish the
object and purpose of the scheme and artifice included, among others, the following acts
by RICKERSON on or about the following dates, in Catawba County, within the
Western District of North Carolina and elsewhere:

DATE ACT

a, 6/30/2020 | Submitted and caused to be submitted fraudulent
application ending in *9875 to the SBA for an EIDL loan
for a business in his own name with the purported
business activity of “Business Services”

b. 1/6/2021 Submitted and caused to be submitted fraudulent
application ending in *0209 to the SBA for an EIDL loan
for a business in his own name with the purported
business activity of “Personal Services”

C. 1/11/2021 | Submitted and caused to be submitted fraudulent
application ending in *5428 to the SBA for an EIDL loan
for a business in his own name with the purported
business activity of “Miscellaneous Services”

d. 1/14/2021 | Submitted and caused to be submitted fraudulent
application ending in *1930 to the SBA for an EIDL loan
for a business in his own name in the purported industry
of “Personal Services”

e. 3/20/2021 | Submitted and caused to be submitted fraudulent
application to Cross River Bank for PPP loan for a
business in his own name with the purported nature of the
business listed as “New Single-Family Housing
Construction”

24. | RICKERSON used the fraudulent proceeds obtained from his scheme to defraud
to make personal payments including the purchase of cryptocurrency and payment of bills.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

NOTICE OF FORFEITURE

Notice is hereby given of 18 U.S.C. § 982 and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). Under Section
2461(c), criminal forfeiture is applicable to any offenses for which forfeiture is authorized

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 6 of 7
by any other statute, including but not limited to 18 U.S.C. § 981 and all specified unlawful
activities listed or referenced in 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7), which are incorporated as to
proceeds by Section 981(a)(1)(C). The following property is subject to forfeiture in
accordance with Section 982 and/or 2461(c):

a. All property which constitutes or is derived from proceeds of the Count Two
violation set forth in this bill of indictment; and

b. If, as set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), any property described in (a) cannot be located
upon the exercise of due diligence, has been transferred or sold to, or deposited
with, a third party, has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court, has been
substantially diminished in value, or has been commingled with other property
which cannot be divided without difficulty, all other property of the defendant/s to
the extent of the value of the property described in (a).

The following property is subject to forfeiture on one or more of the grounds stated
above: a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of $52,477, such amount constituting
the proceeds of the Count Two violation.

DENA J. KING
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

ASSISTANT Oy DG STATES ATTORNEY

ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

Case 5:22-cr-00013-KDB-DCK Document3 Filed 03/15/22 Page 7 of 7


File and source

File

3-bill-of-indictment-spenc-r-denard-rickerson.pdf

Size

791,083 bytes

SHA-256

febe89af7c04e57265f1ce05e68fb6ae839ba0cbd05a7bede64b2e80914c79a5

Our copy

3-bill-of-indictment-spenc-r-denard-rickerson.pdf

Original

archive.org