Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 1 of 31
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Criminal No. 22-124(7) (NEB/DTS)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO
v. ) DEFENDANT’S POSITION
) REGARDING SENTENCING AND
MUKHTAR MOHAMED SHARIFF, ) OBJECTIONS TO PSR
)
Defendant. )
The United States of America, by and through its attorneys, Lisa D.
Kirkpatrick, Acting United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, and Joseph
H. Thompson, Harry M. Jacobs, Matthew S. Ebert, and Daniel W. Bobier, Assistant
United States Attorneys, submits the following response to defendant’s position
regarding sentencing and objections to the PSR. Dkt. ##636, 667.
I. BACKGROUND
Defendant Mukhtar Shariff participated in the largest Covid-19 fraud scheme
in the United States—a scheme in which he and his co-conspirators stole tens of
millions of dollars federal child nutrition program funds intended to feed
disadvantaged children. During the trial, Shariff disregarded the fundamental rules
of courtroom conduct by recording hours and hours of witness testimony. At the end
of the trial, Shariff attempted to destroy a video of his co-defendants’ attempt to bribe
a trial juror and pay her $120,000 in cash in exchange for a not guilty verdict. Shariff’s
crimes have shaken Minnesota to its core—both in terms of the brazen and staggering
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 2 of 31
nature of the fraud and the complete disrespect and contempt shown for the criminal
justice system. His crimes have changed the state forever, and not for the better.
The Court must send a message in the strongest possible terms to Shariff and
anyone else who believes they can shamelessly take advantage of state and federal
programs, steal with impunity money intended for children, and abuse the rights
afforded by the criminal justice system.
A. Shariff’s Objections to the Offense Conduct
Shariff raises an array of objections to the PSR’s description of the offense
conduct. Dkt. #636. In doing so, he essentially re-raises the same trial defenses that
the jury rejected.
His objections fall into several general categories.
First, Shariff objects to the PSR’s description of Afrique Hospitality Group and
his role in Afrique. See, e.g., Dkt. #636 at 2-3. As in his trial testimony, Shariff
attempts to distance himself from the organization he created and led as CEO. But
the PSR accurately describes Afrique as an entity that Shariff created and used to
receive and launder fraudulently obtained federal child nutrition program funds.
Shariff registered Afrique with the Minnesota Secretary of State on January 6, 2021.
As the Court heard at trial and saw in the PowerPoint outlining the Afrique business
plan, Shariff created Afrique to build and operate a for-profit cultural center using
federal child nutrition program funds. See Gov’t Ex. G-110.
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 3 of 31
Almost immediately, the food site Shariff ran at Dar al Farooq began claiming
to be serving meals to 2,000 children a day. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. C-361. Within a month,
the site claimed to be serving meals to 3,500 children a day. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. C-360.
Second, Shariff attempts to distance himself from the actions of his co-
conspirators by requesting that the offense conduct change the phrase “the
defendants” to “some of the defendants, not including Mukhtar Shariff.” Dkt. #636 at
4. In doing so, he ignores basic conspiracy law, which holds that conspirators are
responsible for the actions of their co-conspirators. Here, having ran the largest
fraudulent food distribution site involved in this indictment, and having received and
laundered fraudulent proceeds from an array of individuals and entities involved in
the larger scheme to defraud the federal child nutrition program, Shariff cannot now
disclaim responsibility for the full scope of the fraud scheme.
Third, Shariff insists that Wadani Consulting and Nomadic Ventures were not
created for use in receiving and laundering fraud proceeds. This is wrong. Shariff
registered Wadani Consulting on January 6, 2021—the same day that he registered
Afrique Hospitality Group LLC. See Gov’t Ex. B-7 and B-8. Shariff opened an account
in the name of Wadani Consulting on February 16, 2021. See Gov’t Ex. O-53. Over
3
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 4 of 31
the course of the next 10 months, Shariff deposited more than $480,000 into the
Wadani Consulting account, including $200,000 from Afrique, $80,000 from Empire
Enterprises, and $39,000 from Empire Cuisine & Market. Gov’t Ex. M-31, O-53 at
126, 138, 145.
As shown in Government Exhibit M-31, almost all of the funds that Shariff deposited
into the Wadani Consulting account were the proceeds of his fraud scheme.
4
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 5 of 31
Similarly, Shariff did not register Nomadic Ventures LLC until September 20,
2021. Gov’t Ex. B-28. Shariff then opened an account in the name of Nomadic
Ventures LLC on October 15, 2021. Gov’t Ex. O-51. Shariff did not use the company
to conduct legitimate, lawful business. He used it to receive and launder fraud
proceeds. The first significant deposit into the account was a $100,000 wire transfer
from Wadani Consulting on November 5, 2021. Gov’t Ex. O-51 at 11. The following
month, Shariff deposited an $80,000 check from Empire Cuisine and Market. Gov’t
Ex. O-51 at 82.
B. Shariff’s Objection to the Loss Calculation
The PSR correctly applied a 22-level enhancement because the loss amount
was more than $25 million but less than $65 million. PSR ¶109.
Guidelines section 2B1.1 provides that the loss amount is “the greater of the
actual loss or intended loss.” Guidelines § 2B1.1(b)(1), app. Note 3. The government
must prove the intended loss by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v.
Holthaus, 486 F.3d 451, 454 (8th Cir. 2007). “The district court’s method for
calculating the amount of loss must be reasonable, but the loss need not be
determined with precision.” United States v. Hodge, 588 F.3d 970, 973 (8th Cir. 2009)
5
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 6 of 31
(quoting United States v. McIntosh, 492 F.3d 956, 960–61 (8th Cir.2007)). “Because
the damage wrought by fraud is sometimes difficult to calculate, a district court is
charged only with reasonably estimating the loss using a preponderance of evidence
standard.” United States v. Alexander, 679 F.3d 721, 731 (8th Cir. 2012) (quoting
United States v. McKanry, 628 F.3d 1010, 1019 (8th Cir. 2010)). Appellate courts
“accord particular deference to the loss determination because of the district court's
unique ability to assess the evidence and estimate the loss.” United States v. Scott,
448 F.3d 1040, 1044 (8th Cir. 2006) (internal citations omitted).
As shown and presented at trial in Government Exhibits N-3 and N-5, the
defendants submitted to MDE reimbursement claims for more than $49 million in
federal child nutrition program funds. Of this, MDE paid out approximately
$47,920,514 to the entities that sponsored the defendants’ participation in the
program, Partners in Nutrition and Feeding Our Future.1 Those sponsors, in turn,
retained approximately $5.6 million in administrative fees. The sponsors then paid
over approximately $42,407,515 to Empire Cuisine & Market, ThinkTechAct, and
other entities owned or controlled by the defendants, including more than $21 million
to ThinkTechAct and more than $12 million to Empire Cuisine & Market.
1 Pursuant to Guidelines § 5E1.1, Shariff and his co-defendants owe restitution for the
full amount of the victim’s loss. Accordingly, the Court should order Shariff to pay
$47,920,514 in restitution.
6
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 7 of 31
As depicted in Government Exhibit N-3, in addition to the more than $36
million received by the entities owned by the defendants themselves, more than $6
million in federal child nutrition program funds were sent by Partners in Nutrition
and Feeding Our Future to other non-profit entities used as part of the scheme,
including Somali Community Resettlement Services, The Free Minded Institute, and
St. Cloud Somali Athletic Club. The government introduced at trial bank records and
summary charts showing the flow of funds into and out of these entities.2
2 See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. M-28, O-144, and O-145 (Somali Community Resettlement
Services); M-29 and O-141 (The Free Minded Institute); M-27 and O-152 (St. Cloud Somali
Athletic Club); M-14 (Madina Grocery Inc.); and M-24, O-136, and O-137 (New Prospect
Learning Inc.).
7
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 8 of 31
As shown at trial, after receiving the federal child nutrition program funds,
the defendants transferred the funds to and through a variety of entities to launder
the funds. For example, ThinkTechAct—the non-profit company under which most of
the sites were opened—received more than $21 million in federal child nutrition
program funds in 2021.3 Gov’t Ex. M-30. More than $1.7 million of these funds were
sent from ThinkTechAct to Shariff’s company, Afrique. This was in addition to the
millions in federal child nutrition program funds that Afrique received directly from
Feeding Our Future and from other entities involved in the fraudulent receipt of
federal child nutrition program funds. See Gov’t Ex. M-6.
Almost all of the federal child nutrition program funds were transferred into
four companies set up and used by the conspirators as part of the scheme, including
ThinkTechAct Foundation (Mahad Ibrahim and Abdiaziz Farah), Empire Cuisine &
3 In addition to the summary chart, the government introduced at trial records of
ThinkTechAct Foundation’s bank account. Gov’t Ex. O-17.
8
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 9 of 31
Market (Abdiaziz Farah and Mohamed Ismail), Empire Enterprises (Abdiaziz Farah
and Abdimajid Nur), Afrique Hospitality Group (Mukhtar Shariff and Mahad
Ibrahim), and Bushra Wholesalers (Said Farah and Abdiwahab Aftin).4
At trial, the government introduced a chart summarizing all funds that flowed
into, and out of, the various bank accounts opened in the names of these entities.
Gov’t Ex. M-1. This chart showed not only the more than $42 million in federal child
nutrition program funds deposited into the accounts (outlined in blue), but also
accounted for all food purchases by the defendants and their entities (outlined in red).
4 At trial, the government introduced records of the bank accounts opened on behalf of
Afrique Hospitality Group and Bushra Wholesalers along with charts summarizing all funds
flowing into and out of those accounts. See Gov’t Ex. M-6, M-6b, O-20, O-21, and O-22 (Afrique
Hospitality Group), Gov’t Ex. M-13a, O-7, O-8, and O-9 (Empire Cuisine & Market), Gov’t Ex.
M-13z, O-11, and O-12 (Empire Enterprises), and Gov’t Ex. M-10, M-10d, O-24, O-25, and O-
26 (Bushra Wholesalers).
9
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 10 of 31
These food purchases—which totaled approximately $5,106,102—included all
food purchases by the entities, including a significant amount of money spent on
“food” that had nothing to do with the federal child nutrition program. For example,
Empire Cuisine & Market operated a small halal deli and market located in a strip
mall in Shakopee, Minnesota. As depicted in Government Exhibit M-1, the market
had more than $1 million in credit card receipts during the time of the fraud scheme.
In other words, regular customers spent more than $1 million buying food at Empire
Cuisine & Market. As FBI Forensic Accountant Pauline Roase testified at trial, the
funds credited to “food” on Government Exhibit M-1 and other summary charts
introduced at trial included money spent to purchase food and other items (such as
halal meat and baby formula) for sale at the market. And as the Court saw, many of
10
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 11 of 31
the defendants’ food invoices were for the purchase of these types of items unrelated
to the food program. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. D-72 at 62-63, 82 (Lincoln Trading
International invoices for the purchase of goat meat, lamb kidney, and other halal
meats to sell at Empire Cuisine & Market), D-73 (Gold Star Distribution invoices for
the purchase of non-food items to be sold at Empire Cuisine & Market), and Q-46
(Capital Imports invoices showing purchase of food unrelated to the federal child
nutrition program). Nevertheless, FBI Forensic Accountant Pauline Roase testified
that she credited such monies as food expense order to be conservative in her
calculations.
Even so, as to Afrique’s incoming “sources of funds, Government Exhibit M-6
is underinclusive. It does not account for the fact that Afrique claimed to have been
supplying “food” to other entities involved in the broader fraudulent scheme to obtain
federal child nutrition program. Afrique received more than $1.3 million from other
entities involved in the fraudulent receipt of federal child nutrition program. See
Gov’t Ex. M-6.
11
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 12 of 31
This included more than $480,000 from Cosmopolitan Business Solutions, the
company that did business as Safari Restaurant and whose owners have been
charged for their participation in the fraudulent scheme to receive federal child
nutrition program funds. All of the funds in the Cosmopolitan bank account from
which Afrique received the $480,000 consisted of federal child nutrition program
funds received from Feeding Our Future or other entities involved in the scheme.
Gov’t Ex. C-553, C-554, and C-555. And as shown in the summary chart admitted as
Gov’t Ex. C-553, rather than use those funds to purchase food to feed children,
Cosmopolitan sent the funds to a series of entities created and used by conspirators
to receive and launder fraud proceeds, including Tunyar Trading (Abdikadir
12
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 13 of 31
Mohamud), Horseed Management (Abdinasir Abshir), Brava Restaurant (Sharmake
and Ayan Jama), ASA Limited (Abdihakim Ahmed, Salim Said, and Ahmed Ghedi),
Olive Management (Ahmed Omar-Hashim), and 3017 LLC (Abdulkadir Salah). Each
of these individuals has been charged for their role in defrauding the federal child
nutrition program. See United States v. Aimee Marie Bock, et al., 22 CR 223
(NEB/DTS) and United States v. Sharmake Jama, et al., 22 CR 225 (NEB/DTS).
Afrique also received more than $850,000 in federal child nutrition program
funds from a series of entities created by Feeding Our Future employee Ikram
Mohamed and her family members, including Star Distribution, Inspiring Youth &
Out Reach, Active Mind’s Youth, and United Youth of Mpls. The individuals who
13
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 14 of 31
created and ran these companies have been charged for their role in the fraudulent
scheme to obtain federal child nutrition program funds. See United States v. Ikram
Yusuf Mohamed, et al., 24 CR 15 (NEB/DTS).
For example, in April and May 2021, Shariff deposited into the Afrique account
two checks totaling $169,000 from Inspiring Youth and Outreach LLC. The memo
lines on the checks indicated that the money was for “food expense.” Gov’t Ex. C-506
at 154, 176.
Inspiring Youth and Outreach was registered with the Minnesota Secretary of
State on February 2, 2021. Gov’t Ex. C-496. Within a matter of weeks, the entity
claimed to be serving meals to more than 1,000 children per day. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex.
C-498, C-501, C-504. The site later claimed to be serving meals to 2,500 children per
day. Gov’t Ex. C-501.
As Forensic Accountant Roase testified at trial, Inspiring Youth and Outreach
14
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 15 of 31
received more than $1.5 million in federal child nutrition program funds from
Feeding Our Future in 2021. Almost none of this money was spent on food. Instead,
it was sent to entities created and used to receive the proceeds of the fraud scheme,
including Afrique and Star Distribution, a company created by Ikram Mohamed’s
brother and used to receive and launder fraud proceeds.
Shariff also received $139,000 from Active Mind’s Youth, an entity created by
Ikram Mohamed’s mother on February 4, 2021, and used as part of the scheme to
fraudulently obtain federal child nutrition program funds. Gov’t Ex. C-486. Five days
before the company was even registered with the Minnesota Secretary of State—and
before the company had a bank account—it claimed to be serving meals to more than
2,000 children per day staring on January 31, 2021. Gov’t Ex. C-488.
15
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 16 of 31
The Active Mind’s bank account was not opened until March 25, 2021. Gov’t
Ex. C-392. When it was, account records show that the account was used solely to
receive federal child nutrition program funds from Feeding Our Future—and that
those funds were not used to purchase food but instead to distribute money to other
entities involved in the fraud scheme, including Star Distribution, Dua Supplies &
Distribution,5 S & S Catering,6 and Afrique. Gov’t Ex. 491.
5 The owner of Dua Supplies & Distribution has pled guilty for her role in the fraud
scheme. United States v. Farhiya Mohamud, 22 CR 226(5) (NEB/DTS).
6 The owner S & S Catering has pled guilty for her role in the fraud scheme as have
several other individuals involved with S & S Catering. See United States v. Qamar Ahmed
Hassan, 22 CR 224 (NEB/DTS).
16
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 17 of 31
Shariff deposited into the Afrique account three checks totaling more than
$139,000 from Active Mind’s Youth purportedly for the purchase of food from Afrique.
Gov’t Ex. C-392 at 134, 137, 207.
Shariff and Afrique also purportedly sold $96,000 worth of “food” to United
Youth of MPLS, an entity in December 2020 for use in carrying out the fraudulent
scheme to obtain federal child nutrition program funds. Gov’t Ex. C-559. At times,
United Youth of MPLS claimed to be serving meals to more than 2,600 children per
day. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. C-556 and C-557.
17
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 18 of 31
Bank records show that United Youth of MPLS received more than $2.2 million
in federal child nutrition program funds in 2021. Again, the bulk of this money was
simply distributed among various entities created to receive and launder fraud
proceeds, including Afrique. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. C-568, C-569.
18
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 19 of 31
United Youth of MPLS paid more than $96,000 to Shariff’s company, Afrique.
According to the memo line on the check, the money was for the purchase of food.
Gov’t Ex. C-569 at 54, 59.
Ikram Mohamed later circulated invoices from Afrique purporting to show that
United Youth of MPLS had purchased food from Afrique. Gov’t Ex. C-567. As with
many of the invoices in the case, they appear to be fake insofar as there are multiple
versions of that invoice with the same date (though bearing different line entries).
19
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 20 of 31
Shariff and Afrique also purportedly sold more than $440,000 worth of food to
Star Distribution, a fake food distribution company created and used by Ikram
Mohamed’s brother, Suleman Mohamed, to receive and launder fraud proceeds. In
all, Star Distribution received more than $10 million in federal child nutrition
program funds from Feeding Our Future and other entities involved in the fraud
scheme. Gov’t Ex. C-570, C-571, and C-572. More than $448,000 of these funds were
sent from Star Distribution to Afrique. See Gov’t Ex. C-570.
20
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 21 of 31
1. The PSR correctly found that Shariff is responsible for the
entire loss caused by the conspiracy
Shariff makes two arguments with respect to the loss amount. First, he argues
that he should only be responsible for fraudulent claims related to the Dar al Farooq
site and two other sites for which Shariff specifically submitted fraudulent claims and
not the total amount of loss he and his co-conspirators caused through all their
various entities and sites. Second, he argues that the loss amount is overstated and
should be reduced based on the food purchased, and meals provided, by the
defendants. Both arguments fail.
Despite the fact that he and his co-conspirators obtained well more than $40
million in federal child nutrition program funds, Shariff argues that his loss figure
21
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 22 of 31
under the Guidelines should be limited to the fraudulent claims related to the Dar al
Farooq site and two other sites for which Shariff specifically submitted fraudulent
claims. In effect, he is asking the Court to ignore the fact that he participated in a
massive conspiracy and fraudulent scheme through which he has his co-conspirators
took home more than $40 million in fraud proceeds. This the Court should not do. It
is black letter law that defendants are responsible for the reasonably foreseeable
actions of their co-conspirators. Here, Shariff joined and participated in a massive
fraud scheme through which he and his co-conspirators made tens of millions of
dollars over a brief 18-month period. Shariff not only submitted fraudulent claims for
the single largest fraudulent food site operated within the conspiracy, he also created
and used Afrique to receive and launder fraud proceeds for all of the entities involved
in the scheme, including ThinkTechAct Foundation ($1.7 million), Feeding Our
Future ($1.1 million), Empire Cuisine and Market/Empire Enterprises ($800,000),
Saint Cloud Somali Athletic Club ($260,000), and Bushra Wholesalers ($69,000). See
Gov’t Ex. M-6. In addition, and as explained above, Shariff used Afrique to receive
and launder fraud proceeds for several other entities involved in the fraudulent
receipt of federal child nutrition program funds, including Cosmopolitan Business
Solutions ($480,000), Star Distribution ($440,000), Inspiring Youth and Outreach
($169,000), Active Mind’s Youth ($139,000), and United Youth of MPLS ($96,000).7
Id. In light of the scope and extent of Shariff’s involvement in the fraud scheme, the
7 Because Shariff used Afrique to aid these other entities in their fraudulent scheme,
he should arguably be responsible for the losses caused by those entities, which collectively
included an additional $50 million.
22
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 23 of 31
idea that he should not be responsible for the full scope of that fraud scheme is
absurd.
2. The loss amount far exceeded $25 million even if the Court
credits all money spent on food, even the money spent on
food unrelated to the federal child nutrition program
The Sentencing Guidelines allow for credits against loss in certain situations.
The Guidelines provide that the loss shall be reduced by the “fair market value . . . of
services rendered by the defendant or other persons acting jointly with the defendant,
to the victim before the offense was detected.” Guidelines § 2B1.1, app. Note 3(E)(i).
The advisory notes further provide that in cases involving government benefits, such
as grants, loans, or entitlement program payments, the loss “shall be considered to
be not less than the value of the benefit . . . diverted to unintended uses.” Guidelines
§ 2B1.1, app. note 3(F)(ii).
Here, the government disagrees that the loss figure should be reduced based
on the value of the food actually provided by the defendants. As the Court heard at
trial, the defendants served some food, but mainly as window dressing for their fraud
scheme. And when they did so, they did not do so in a manner consistent with the
rules of the federal child nutrition program. Even with the Covid waivers, the federal
child nutrition program had rules about what qualified as a reimbursable meal. As
MDE employee Emily Honer testified, even with the waivers, the program generally
did not allow for the service of bulk groceries, such as onions, potatoes, and uncooked
rice. In those circumstances where it did, the program required the food to be served
or delivered with instructions and appropriate measurements so that a child could
prepare a meal from the food provided. That did not happen here. Instead, much of
23
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 24 of 31
the food was simply bulk groceries, such as onions, potatoes, and rice—not meals
suitable and intended for children. As Honer testified, MDE would not have approved
defendants’ claims and paid out federal child nutrition program reimbursement funds
had they been aware of how defendants were operating. In other words, while the
defendants may have served some food, they did not do so in a manner that benefited
MDE or the federal child nutrition program. Accordingly, the government does not
believe they should receive credit for the food they purchased or distributed, in
essence, to make it look good.
In deciding whether a defendant receives credit against loss, courts look to a
defendant’s subjective intent. That is, courts look to whether the items provided were
provided in good faith, rather than to further the fraud scheme by, for example,
lulling a victim into a false sense of complacency. See, e.g., United States v. Hartstein,
500 F.3d 790, 797-98 (8th Cir. 2007); United States v. Hatchett, 622 F.3d 984, 987-88
(8th Cir. 2010) (same). Here, as the Court heard at trial, the defendants did not enroll
in the federal child nutrition program to feed children. They did so to get rich. Indeed,
the Court saw how members of the conspiracy describe the food program as a “golden
ticket.” Gov’t Ex. H-54a at 4.
24
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 25 of 31
Similarly, in a text message exchange, Shariff’s co-defendants Abdiaziz Farah
and Abdimajid Nur discussed social media posts in which the “youth of Dar al Farooq”
accused Shariff of being the “master mind” of a scheme to use the names of youth
basketball players to defraud the federal child nutrition program.
The Court also saw Shariff and his co-conspirators talking about using federal
child nutrition program funds to build a for-profit community center and co-working
space (Gov’t Ex. 110 at 9) and purchase real estate and construct condo buildings in
Kenya. See, e.g., Gov’t Ex. H-50b (Shariff and Abdiaziz Farah discussing the
25
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 26 of 31
opportunity to build “Afrique apartments” and “Empire apartments” on land Abdiaziz
Farah had purchased in Nairobi, Kenya). There was little or no discussion of children.
Because the food defendants served was little more than window dressing, the
Court should not credit defendants for any food they provided.
That being said, even if the Court credits defendants for all money spent on
food, the loss amount far surpasses the $25 million benchmark that triggers the 22-
level enhancement under Guidelines § 2B1.1(b)(1)(L). This is true even if the Court
credits funds used to purchase food to sell at the halal market and deli, which had
nothing to do with the federal child nutrition program, and for other entities beyond
the scope of the actions charged in this indictment.
Finally, Shariff argues that the Sentencing Guidelines put too much emphasis
on the amount of the loss caused by the fraud scheme. The government disagrees.
Setting aside his general criticism of the Sentencing Guidelines, this case is hardly
one where the loss amount overstates the severity of the crime. Shariff participated
in one of the most despicable and notorious fraud schemes in recent memory. He and
his co-conspirators took advantage of a once-in-a-century global pandemic to steal
money intended to be used to feed disadvantaged children. That Shariff does not
recognize the immorality of his crime is reason enough to impose a significant
sentence.
C. The PSR Correctly applied a 2-level enhancement because
Shariff misrepresented that he was acting on behalf of a
charitable, educational, or religious organization
The PSR correctly found that Shariff receives a 2-level offense level
enhancement under Guidelines § 2B1.1(b)(9)(B) because he misrepresented that he
26
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 27 of 31
acted to obtain a benefit on behalf of a charitable, educational, or religious
organization when, in fact, the defendant to divert all or part of that benefit for his
personal gain. The plain language of this enhancement applies here—where Shariff
purported to be submitting claims for a federally funded child nutrition program on
behalf of a religious or educational organization—namely, Dar al Farooq. Indeed,
throughout his trial testimony, Shariff claimed that he was working with and for Dar
al Farooq to serve food to children. In reality, he diverted much of the resulting
federal child nutrition program funds for his own benefit and that of his co-
conspirators.
D. The PSR correctly found that Shariff was an average
participant in the scheme
The PSR correctly found that Shariff was an average participant in the fraud
scheme and that he was not entitled to a role reduction under Guidelines § 3B1.2.
Guidelines section 3B1.2 provides that defendants who played a minor or
minimal role in the offense may receive an offense level reduction. The application
notes explain that the reduction is for “a defendant who plays a part in committing
the offense that makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant
in the criminal activity.” Guidelines § 3B1.2, application note 3. In the fraud context,
the application notes provide an example of “a defendant in a health care fraud
scheme, whose participation in the scheme was limited to serving as a nominee owner
and who received little personal gain relative to the amount.” Id.
That is a far cry from the facts of this case. As explained above, Shariff was
extensively involved in the fraud scheme. He ran the largest food site. He signed and
27
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 28 of 31
submitted fraudulent meal counts. And he received and laundered fraud proceeds for
his co-conspirators and others involved the fraud scheme. Therefore, he is not entitled
to a minor role reduction even if he was less involved in the fraud than some of his
co-defendants. United States v. Ponce, 311 F.3d 911, 913 (8th Cir. 2002) (“The mere
fact that a defendant is less culpable than his co-defendants does not entitle
defendant to ‘minor participant’ status.”).
E. The Court should not depart from the Guidelines range
Finally, Shariff asks the Court to depart from the Guidelines range, including
based on the extended uncertainty he has faced during the investigation and since
his post-conviction confinement. Dkt. #667 at 29-32. This is not grounds for a
downward departure. The “uncertainty” Shariff has faced is due to his own
involvement in a notorious and shameful fraud scheme—one that took advantage of
a government program designed to feed hungry and disadvantaged children. Shariff
was a full participant in that scheme. After being caught, he testified falsely at his
trial, denying his guilt and attempting to portray himself as a well-intentioned civic
leader. He was no such thing. During the trial, Shariff flagrantly violated the Court’s
rules and basic courtroom decorum by recording hours and hours of witness testimony
on his cell phone.
His co-defendants attempted to corrupt our judicial system by bribing a trial
juror with $120,000 in cash in exchange for returning an unjustified not guilty
verdict. Despite his denials of knowledge of that scheme, Shariff knew of it before it
came to light. Abdiaziz Farah told him about the bribe shortly after it happened.
Farah even sent Shariff a video recording of Ladan Ali delivering the bribe to the
28
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 29 of 31
juror’s house. Because Shariff deleted his messaging application in an attempt to
conceal his knowledge of the bribe plot, the government only recovered Abdiaziz
Farah’s side of the conversation. But even one-sided, the conversation is chilling.
9:52 p.m. Bro
9:54 p.m. Alx Bro. This is our life. Inshallah I will do my best bro.
Also do you know how to clear blurry videos.
9:55 p.m. It was taken from the car when it was raining.
Ok bro let me know. The video is on my other phone.
9:58 p.m. That’s where she usually sits everyday…this was scoped
out by my guy [sent along with a photo]
10:14 p.m. He is gonna send someone to drop off some $. That’s their
priority.
200 upfront for any movement
10:18 p.m. Mistrial which is great for us than a conviction
If he can come through we got the surety
Not that we will be but it’s probability here we are playing
with
10:26 p.m. 100 for our freedom is nothing bro, worth trying everything
bro
10:29 p.m. That’s it bro. I have a good feeling she will come through
and that’s a lot of money for her family.
Cash bro
10:35 p.m. It’s a team effort bro
10:37 p.m. I am not worried bro. I shared because I trust bro don’t
worry about that stuff.”
11:01 p.m. Get some sleep man. You got judge Nancy . . . waiting for
you
29
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 30 of 31
11:08 p.m. Ameen bro. She is a terrible human being. My wife and
siblings stopped coming to court coz they couldn’t stand her
11:14 p.m. She is still a G employee who is jealous of all of us.
InshaAllah it will be smooth bro! Goodnight bro.
As court began the following morning, the government immediately announced the
bribe attempt and moved to take Shariff and his co-defendants into custody. At the
government’s request, the Court directed the defendants to turn their cell phones over
to the FBI case agent.
As this was happening, Shariff and his co-defendants took steps to delete the
incriminating evidence from their phones.
At 8:31 a.m., Abdimajid Nur uninstalled and deleted the Signal encrypted
message app from his iPhone.
At 8:41 a.m., Abdiaziz Farah did a factory reset of his iPhone.
At 8:43 a.m., Mukhtar Shariff uninstalled and deleted the Signal encrypted
messaging app from his iPhone.
For his part, Said Farah deleted the incriminating Signal messages from his
phone one at a time.
This is who Mukhtar Shariff is. He participated in two of the most brazen and
notorious crimes in Minnesota history. For his crimes, the government asks the Court
to impose a sentence of 262 months in prison, which is the top of the Guidelines range.
30
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 782 Filed 01/22/25 Page 31 of 31
II. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the government respectfully requests that the
Court impose a sentence of 262 months in prison.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dated: January 22, 2025 LISA D. KIRKPATRICK
Acting United States Attorney
/s/ Joseph H. Thompson
BY: JOSEPH H. THOMPSON
HARRY M. JACOBS
MATTHEW S. EBERT
DANIEL W. BOBIER
Assistant U.S. Attorneys
31