Indictment — No. 4:24-cr-00283 (Dkt. 1, N.D. Cal.)

Summary

An indictment in United States of America v. Lane Jenkins, Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division, filed May 23, 2024 as Document 1. It lists violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud), 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3) (false writings) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, with a forfeiture allegation. The grand jury alleges that Jenkins obtained over $1 million through PPP and EIDL applications, including an EIDL loan of $94,900.00 and a PPP loan of $520,833.33 for A & L Investments LLC, which it states had no employees or payroll. It alleges that the PPP application claimed 25 employees and monthly payroll of $321,642.00 and attached a false 2019 1120-S Form reporting gross sales of $4,312,956.00. The filing includes a criminal cover sheet as Document 1-1.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page 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.

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 2 of 12

Gnuited States District Court | F ILED

FOR THE My
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, AY 23 2024
VENUE: OAKLAND OaKLCT TOR 6! Cou

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
V.

LANE JENKINS,

CR-24-0283 smo

DEFENDANT(S).

INDICTMENT

18 U.S.C. § 1343 — Wire Fraud;
18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3) — False Writings;
18 U.S.C. § 2 — Aiding and Abetting;
18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c);
18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2) — Forfeiture Allegation

A true bill.

oreman

Filed in open court this 23rd__ day of

May, 2024

Clerk

— e Bail, $ __No Process

HON; DONNA M. RYU, Chief Magistrate Judge
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 3 of 12

ISMAIL J. RAMSEY (CABN 189820)
United States Attorney

MAY 23 ano,
TRICT oe'ST Coy
O OF AT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CASE NO. C Ke ous ? ih — ( 0 ‘A

) td

Plaintiff, )
) VIOLATIONS:
v. ) 18 U.S.C. § 1343 — Wire Fraud; ;

) 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3) — False Writings; AMO
LANE JENKINS, ) 18 U.S.C. § 2— Aiding and Abetting;

) 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c);

Defendant. ) 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2) — Forfeiture Allegation

)

) OAKLAND VENUE

)

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury charges:

Introductory Allegations

At all times relevant to this Indictment, unless otherwise specified:

1. Defendant Lane JENKINS was a resident of El Sobrante, California, and was the
President of A & L Investments LLC (“A&L”), a real estate business that purported to purchase,
renovate, and sell distressed properties. A&L was founded in 2016, with its purported headquarters in
El Sobrante, California.

2. JENKINS was an owner of A&L, and had control over, and was a signatory for, a
business account ending in 1678 in the name of A&L, held at a bank with offices in the United States

and that was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) (Bank 1).

INDICTMENT ]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 4 of 12

3. JENKINS had joint ownership of and control over, and was a signatory, for a bank
account ending in 3280 that was in his name, held at a bank with offices in the United States and that
was insured by the FDIC (Bank 2).

The Small Business Administration

4, The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an executive-branch
agency of the United States government that provided support to entrepreneurs and small businesses.
The mission of the SBA was to maintain and strengthen to the nation’s economy by enabling the
establishment and viability of small businesses and by assisting in the economic recovery of
communities after disasters.

The Paycheck Protection Program

5. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a federal law
enacted in or around March 2020 and designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions
of Americans who are suffering from the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. One
source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of up to $349 billion in forgivable
loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred to as
the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). In or around April 2020, Congress authorized over $300
billion in additional PPP funding.

6. In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to submit 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 and representations in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan. In the
PPP loan application, the small business, (through its authorized representative) was required to state,
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. The applicant for a PPP loan must state that the United States is the principal
place of residence for all employees of the applicant included in the payroll calculation on the

application.

INDICTMENT 2
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 5 of 12

7. A PPP loan application was required to be processed by a participating lender. If a PPP
loan application was approved, the participating lender ed the PPP loan using its own monies, which
were 100% guaranteed by the SBA. 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.

8. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses—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 expense
items within a designated period of time after receiving the proceeds and used a certain amount of the
PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses.

Economic Injury Disaster Loan

0, The Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) program was a program administered by
SBA that provided low-interest financing to small businesses, renters, and homeowners in regions
affected by declared disasters.

10. The CARES act also authorized the SBA to provide EIDL loans of up to $2 million to
eligible small businesses experiencing substantial financial disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In addition, the CARES Act authorized the SBA to issue advances of up to $10,000 to small businesses
within three days of applying for an EIDL loan. The amount of the advance was determined by the
number of employees the applicant certified having. The advances did not have to be repaid.

11. In order to obtain an EIDL loan and/or advance, a qualifying business was required to
submit an application to the SBA and provide information about its operations, such as number of
employee, gross revenues for the 12-month period preceding the disaster, and cost of goods sold in the
12-month period preceding the disaster. In the case of EIDL loans for COVID-19 relief, the 12-month
period was that preceding January 31, 2020. The applicant was also required to certify that all of the
information in the application was true and accurate to the best of the applicant’s knowledge.

12. EIDL applications were submitted directly to the SBA. The amount of the loan, if the
application was approved, was determined based, in part, on the information provided by the applicant

about the employment, revenue, and cost of goods, as described above. Any funds issued under an

INDICTMENT
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 6 of 12

EIDL loan or advance were issued directly by the SBA. EIDL funds could be used for payroll expenses,
sick leave, production costs, and business obligations, such as debts, rent, and mortgage payments. If
the applicant also obtained a loan under the PPP, the EIDL funds amount needed to be declared by the
applicant and deducted from the total loan eligibility.

Relevant PPP Lenders and Affiliated Companies

13. Lender 1 was an SBA Preferred Lender and participated as an SBA-approved PPP lender
to small businesses.

The Scheme to Defraud

14. Beginning at a date unknown, but no later than on or about July 2, 2020 and continuing to
a date unknown, but to at least on or about December 20, 2021, JENKINS devised and executed a
scheme and artifice to defraud through which he obtained over $1 million as a result of fraudulent PPP
and EIDL loan applications. Although each of the PPP loan applications certified payroll and employee
amounts for A&L, in reality, A&L had no employees or payroll. Upon receipt of the PPP loan proceeds,
JENKINS did not use the funds to pay employees. Rather, he used the funds for personal expenses,
payments to people to whom he owed money, and payment to an individual who helped him submit the
loan applications. To aid and cover up the scheme, JENKINS submitted fake IRS forms for A&L that
were submitted with the applications. He further submitted a false application for forgiveness of the
loans which included similar false statements as the loan applications as well as a falsified bank account
statement that falsely showed payroll expenses from an A&L account.

Manner and Means of the Scheme to Defraud

The EIDL Loan Fraud

The EIDL Loan application

15 On July 2, 2020, JENKINS caused to be submitted to the SBA an EIDL loan application
in the name “LANE JENKINS”. On the application, JENKINS represented the business as a “Sole-
Proprietorship” and listed the detailed business activity as: “Maid and Cleaning Service.” The
application falsely stated that this business had 10 employees. JENKINS falsely listed his gross revenue
as $241,353.00 and cost of goods as $21,654.00. The email, phone number, social security number,
address, and bank account number listed on the application belonged to JENKINS. JENKINS checked

INDICTMENT 4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 7 of 12

“Yes” to the following certification: “I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
United States that the above is true and correct.” These statements were false because JENKINS knew
that he did not have 10 employees, a gross revenue of $ 241,353.000, and $21,654.00 spent on goods.
16. On or about July 21, 2020, based on the representations made by JENKINS in the
application, the SBA approved the EIDL loan and wired $94,900.00 into JENKINS’ account at Bank 2
ending 3280. The signatory for this bank account was JENKINS. Per JENKINS’ bank records, the
aforementioned wire was reflected on JENKINS’ bank account on July 23, 2021. Upon receiving the
funds, JENKINS transferred approximately $60,000 to his other account at Bank 1 ending in 1678.
Additionally, JENKINS spent $5,000 on personal expenses.
First PPP Loan Application
Lh On February 11, 2021, JENKINS caused a loan application for PPP funds to be submitted
on behalf of A&L to Lender 1.

18. The loan application listed the person who submitted the application as “Lane Jenkins.”
The email address provided in the loan application belonged to JENKINS, and the social security
number provided in the loan application belonged to JENKINS.

The loan application contained or included attached the following information:

a. The monthly payroll for A&L was $321,642.00, which based on the SBA PPP Loan
calculation made A&L eligible for a $520,833.33 loan;

b. A&L had 25 employees located in the United States;

c. The purpose of the loan was to pay payroll costs, rent/mortgage interest, utilities and eligible
covered expenses;

d. “Yes” was checked in response to the question: “Is the United States the principal place of
residence for all employees of the Applicant included in the Applicant’s payroll calculation
above [$321,642.00];”

e. JENKINS’ initials on the following certifications: “I further certify that the information
provided in this application and the information provided in all supporting documents and
forms is true and accurate in all material respects. I understand that knowingly making a false

statement to obtain a guaranteed loan from SBA is punishable under the law”;

INDICTMENT 5
10
1]
12

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 8 of 12

f. A false 2019 1120-S Form that purported that A & L had gross sales of $4,312,956.00, with a
net income of $275,526;

A false 2020 941 Quarterly Form purporting that A&L had 25 employees and paid

ga

$833,677.75 in wages, tips, and other compensation; and
h. A false 2019 940 Federal Unemployment Tax Act (“FUTA”) Form purporting that A&L paid
a total of $3,859,711.45 to all employees.

19. On or about February 13, 2021, based on the representations made by JENKINS in the
application, Lender 1 approved the PPP loan and wired $520,833.33 into the A&L bank account at Bank
1 ending 1678. The signatory for this bank account was JENKINS. Per A & L Investment bank
records, the aforementioned money was reflected in A&L’s bank account on February 16, 2021. Upon
receiving the $520,833.33, JENKINS spent some of the money on personal expenses that were not
eligible covered expenses.

20. Multiple representations made by JENKINS in the loan application were materially false
and intended to defraud Lender 1. JENKINS knew that A&L did not have 25 employees. JENKINS
knew that A&L did not spend $321,642.00 in payroll expenses because A&L did not have employees.
JENKINS did not spend the money on eligible expenses, and JENKINS knew the attachments, including
the various forms, were false.

Second PPP Loan Application

AL, On April 08, 2021, JENKINS caused a loan application for PPP funds to be submitted on
behalf of A&L to Lender 1.

22. The loan application listed the person who submitted the application as “Lane Jenkins.”
The email address provided in the loan application belonged to JENKINS, and the social security
number provided in the loan application belonged to JENKINS.

DA The loan application contained or included attached the following false statements:

a. The monthly payroll for A&L was $323,099.00, which based on the SBA PPP Loan
calculation made A&L eligible for a $520,833.00 loan;
b. A&L had 25 employees located in the United States;

c. The purpose of the loan was to pay payroll costs, rent/mortgage interest, utilities and

INDICTMENT 6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
zy
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 9 of 12

eligible covered expenses;

d. “Yes” was checked in response to the question: “Is the United States the principal
place of residence for all employees of the Applicant included in the Applicant’s
payroll calculation above [$323,099.00];”

e. JENKINS’ initials on the following certifications: “I further certify that the
information provided in this application and the information provided in all
supporting documents and forms is true and accurate in all material respects. |
understand that knowingly making a false statement to obtain a guaranteed loan from
SBA is punishable under the law”; and

f. A false 2019 940 Federal Unemployment Tax Act (“FUTA”) Form purporting that
A&L paid a total of $3,859,711.45 to all employees.

24. On or about May 12, 2021, based on the representations made by JENKINS in the
application, Lender 1 approved the second PPP loan and wired $520,833.00 into the A&L bank account
at Bank 1 ending 1678. The signatory for this bank account was JENKINS. Per A&L bank records, the
aforementioned wire was reflected on A&L’s bank account on May 13, 2021. Upon receiving the
$520,833.33, JENKINS spent some of the money on personal expenses that were not eligible covered
expenses.

25. Multiple representations made by JENKINS in the loan application were materially false
and intended to defraud Lender 1. JENKINS knew that A&L did not have 25 employees. JENKINS
knew that A&L did not spend $323,099.00 in payroll expenses because A&L did not have employees.
JENKINS did not spend the money on eligible expenses, and JENKINS knew that the attachment,
including the Form 940 were false.

26. On or about December 20, 2021, JENKINS submitted a loan forgiveness application for
the February 11 PPP loan for A&L. On this application, JENKINS knowingly made multiple false
representations, that A&L had paid $396,565.08 of the loan in payroll costs and 58 employees. To
support the false statements in the forgiveness application, JENKINS submitted a falsified bank account
statement. As a result of these misrepresentations, SBA forgave the February 11 PPP loan for A&L in

the full amount of $520,833.33.

INDICTMENT 7
10
1]
12

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
7

24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 10 of 12

COUNTS ONE THROUGH THREE: (18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 2 — Wire Fraud and Aiding and

Abetting)

27. Paragraphs 1 through 26 of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated as if fully set
forth here.

28. Beginning at a date unknown to the grand jury, but no later than July 2, 2020, and
continuing through a date unknown to the grand jury, but to at least May 13, 2021, the defendant,

LANE JENKINS,

did knowingly and with the intent to defraud devise and execute, and attempt to execute, a material
scheme and artifice to defraud and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and
fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, and by concealment of material facts.

29. On or about the dates set forth below, in the Northern District of California and
elsewhere, for the purpose of executing the scheme and artifice referred to above, and attempting to do
so, the defendant did knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted writings, signs, signals, pictures,

and sounds in interstate commerce by means of wire communications:

COUNT DATE ITEM WIRED
1 7/21/2020 | Wire transfer of $94,900.00 from SBA to JENKINS
a 2/13/2021 Wire transfer of $520,833.33 from Lender 1 to A&L
3 SI 2202 1 Wire transfer of $520,833.00 from Lender 1 to A&L

Each in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 & 2.
COUNT FOUR: (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001(a)(3) and 2 — False Writings to a Government Agency

and Aiding and Abetting)
30. Paragraphs | through 29 of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated as if fully set
forth here.
31. On or about December 20, 2021, in the Northern District of California and elsewhere, the
defendant,
LANE JENKINS,

did willfully and knowingly make and use a materially false, fictious, and fraudulent document knowing

INDICTMENT 8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 11 of 12

the same to contain a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry, in a matter within
the jurisdiction of an agency of the executive branch of the Government of the United States, namely the
SBA, by submitting a PPP loan forgiveness application to the SBA that contained materially false,
fictitious, and fraudulent statements including that A&L had 58 employees based in the United States,
when in fact A&L had zero employees based in the United States, and that A&L paid approximately
$396,565.08 in payroll expenses, when in fact A&L did not pay any payroll expenses.

All in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001(a)(3) and 2.
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION: (18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c); 18 U.S.C.

§ 982(a)(2) — Criminal and Civil Forfeiture)

32. The allegations contained in this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference
for the purpose of alleging forfeiture pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1(C) and
Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2).

Upon conviction for the offense set forth in Counts One, Two, Three, and Four, upon conviction
of the offense set forth in this Indictment, the defendant,

LANE JENKINS,
shall forfeit to the United States of America, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section
981(a)(1(C) and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), all property, real or personal,
constituting or derived from proceeds the defendants obtained directly and indirectly, as the result of
those violations, including but not limited to a money judgment in the amount of $1,136,566.33.

If any of the property described above, as a result of any act or omission of the defendant:

a. Cannot be located upon exercise of due diligence;

b. Has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;

c. Has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court;

d. Has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. Has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without difficulty,
the United States of America shall be entitled to forfeiture of substitute property pursuant to Title 21,
United States Code, Section 853(p), as incorporated by Title 18, United States Code, Section 2461(c)

and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c).

INDICTMENT 9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ae
28

Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 12 of 12

All pursuant to Tile 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)C), Title 28, United States Code,
Section 2461(c); Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2); and Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 32.2.

DATED: May 23, 2023 A TRUE BILL.

/s/ Foreperson of the Grand Jury
FOREPERSON

ISMAIL J. RAMSEY
United States Attorney

/s/ Kenneth Chambers
KENNETH CHAMBERS
Assistant United States Attorney

INDICTMENT 10
Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Document1 Filed 05/23/24 Page 1 of 12

AO 257 (Rev. 6/78)

DEFENDANT INFORMATION RELATIVE TO A CRIMINAL ACTION - IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT

By: L] comptaint [] INFORMATION INDICTMENT

OFFENSE CHARGED L] SuPERSEDING

Count 1-3: 18 U.S.C. § 1343 — Wire Fraud; 18 U.S.C. § 2- LE] Petty

Aiding and Abetting; .

Count 4: 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3) - False Writings; 18 U.S.C. § 2 CJ Minor

- Aiding and Abetting; 5

18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)C) and 28 U.S.C. 2461(c); 18 U.S.C. § 982 CJ Misde-

(a)(2) - Forfeiture Allegation meanor
Felony

Count 1-3: 20 years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, 3 years of
supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

Count 4:5 years imprisonment, $250,000, 3 years supervised
release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

PENALTY:

Name of District Court, and/or Judge/Magistrate Location

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

(— DEFENDANT - U.S

b LANE JENKINS

DISTRICT COURT NUMBER

CR~24-0283 “°

DEFENDANT

PROCEEDING

Name of Complaintant Agency, or Person (& Title, if any)

FBI

person is awaiting trial in another Federal or State Court,
L] give name of court

this person/proceeding is transferred from another district
L per (circle one) FRCrp 20, 21, or 40. Show District

this is a reprosecution of
a charges previously dismissed

which were dismissed on motion SHOW

of DOCKET NO
[| U.S. ATTORNEY LE] DEFENSE \

this prosecution relates to a
pending case involving this same

defendant MAGISTRATE

prior proceedings or appearance(s)
before U.S. Magistrate regarding this
defendant were recorded under

\ CASE NO.
Name and Office of Person

Furnishing Information on this form ISMAIL J. RAMSEY
U.S. Attorney [] Other U.S. Agency

Name of Assistant U.S.

Attorney (if assigned) KENNETH CHAMBERS

PROCESS:
[_] SUMMONS NO PROCESS* [_] WARRANT

If Summons, complete following:
[| Arraignment | Initial Appearance

Defendant Address:

Comments:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS

Date/Time:

IS NOTIN CUSTODY
Has not been arrested, pending outcome this proceeding.
) If not detained give date any prior
summons was served on above charges d

FILED

3) EF] Is on Bail or Release from ( share

Y 23 20%

ERK, U.S
OAK, T OF CAL OURT

2) [_] Is a Fugitive

IS INCUSTODY
4) [[] On this charge

5) [-] On another conviction

} [_] Federal [_] State
6) [_] Awaiting trial on other charges

If answer to (6) is "Yes", show name of institution

If "Yes"

\ give date
filed

Month/Day/Year

Has detainer L_] Yes
been filed? O No

DATE OF
ARREST

Or... if Arresting Agency & Warrant were not

DATE TRANSFERRED Month/Day/Year
TO U.S. CUSTODY

[| This report amends AO 257 previously submitted

Bail Amount:

* Where defendant previously apprehended on complaint, no new summons or
warrant needed, since Magistrate has scheduled arraignment

Before Judge:
Case 4:24-cr-00283-AMO Documenti1-1 Filed 05/23/24 Pagei1of1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT my 23 dyn

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NORERK, U Sisrs
ICT

CRIMINAL COVER SHEET

Instructions: Effective November 1, 2016, this Criminal Cover Sheet must be completed and submitted,
along with the Defendant Information Form, for each new criminal case.

CASE NAME:

USAV. LANE JENKINS

Is This Case Under Seal?
Total Number of Defendants:

Does this case involve ONLY charges
under 8 U.S.C. § 1325 and/or 1326?

Venue (Per Crim. L.R. 18-1):
Is this a potential high-cost case?

Is any defendant charged with
a death-penalty-eligible crime?

Is this a RICO Act gang case?

Assigned 7

Comments:

Form CAND-CRIM-COVER (Rev. 11/16)

Yes

Yes

SF

Yes

Yes

Yes

CASE NUMBER:

CR-24-0283

No ¥

2-7 8 or more AMO

No ¥

OAK Y SJ

No ¥
No Y

Date Submitted: 5/22/2024

RESET FORM SAVE PDF


File and source

File

1-indictment.pdf

Size

16,158,640 bytes

SHA-256

cbc4e0b89c474fd42ce328f267e080e5d27fed789a09e0c44037b7dea1f506b4

Our copy

1-indictment.pdf

Original

www.justice.gov