Plea Agreement as to Schara Monique Davis — USA v. Gayle et al (Dkt. 89, N.D. Ala.)

Summary

In this plea agreement filed 06/05/24 in the Northern District of Alabama, Schara Monique Davis agrees to plead guilty to Count 7, health care fraud conspiracy, and Count 16, wire fraud conspiracy, and the government agrees to dismiss Counts 1-6, 8-15, and 17-19 at the time of sentencing. The government states it is prepared to prove that Davis was the business manager of a medical practice operated with Francene Gayle, a licensed doctor until March 2020, and that Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue Cross paid more than $2.3 million for office visits billed under Gayle's NPI between 2015 and 2020. It states that in June 2020 the Complete Medical Health account received an EIDL deposit of $9,000, a PPP deposit of $294,730 and an EIDL deposit of $149,900, which Davis and Gayle used for unauthorized purposes.

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.

Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 Filed 06/05/24 Page 1 of 21 FILED

2024 Jun-05 PM 02:02
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN ‘DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES |
Case 5:22-cr-113-LCB-HNJ
Vv.
SCHARA MONIQUE DAVIS |

PLEA AGREEMENT

The Government and the defendant, SCHARA MONIQUE DAVIS, hereby
acknowledge the following plea agreement in this case:
PLEA
The defendant agrees to (i) plead guilty to Counts 7 and 16 of the superseding

indictment filed in the. above-numbered and -captioned matter; (ii) consent to

t

forfeitire as described in section XII below; (iii), pay restitution as determined. by
the Court; and (iv) waive certain rights to direct appeal and collateral attack as
outlined in section IV of this agreement. In exchange, the United States Attomey,
acting on behalf of the Government and through the undersigned Assistant United
States Attomey, agrees to dismiss Counts 1-6, 8-15, and 17-19 at the time of
sentencing and recommend the disposition specified below, subject to the conditions

in section VII.

Page 1 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Sb—
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 2 of 21

TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT

I. MAXIMUM PUNISHMENT

The defendant understands that the maximum statutory punishment that may

be imposed for health care fraud conspiracy, in violation of Title 18, United States

Code, Section 1349, as charged in Count 7, is:

A.

Imprisonment for not more than 10 years;

A fine of not more than $250,000, or

Both A and B;

Supervised release of not more than three years; and

A special assessment of $100.

The defendant understands that the maximum statutory punishment that may

be imposed for wire fraud conspiracy, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1349, as charged in Count 16, is:

- A,

Imprisonment for not more than 20 years;

A fine of not more than $250,000, or

Both A and B;

Supervised release of not more than three years; and

A special assessment of $100.

Page 2 of 24 Defendant's Initials sb-
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 3of21

Il. FACTUAL BASIS FOR PLEA
The Government is prepared to prove, at a minimum, the following facts at
the trial of this case:
A. Relevant Individuals and Entities

_ Francene Gayle was, at all relevant times until March 2020, a licensed doctor
in Alabama who, with the defendant, operated clinics in the northern part of the state.

The defendant is Gayle’s wife and was the business manager for the medical
practice operated with Gayle.

Complete Medical Health was the LLC through which Gayle and the
defendant operated their clinics during the conspiracy period. Complete Medical
Health was wholly owned by the defendant. Previously, Gayle and the defendant
had operated their clinics through a different LLC, Premier Family Medicine, which
was wholly owned by Gayle. During most of the period between 2014 and 2020,
Gayle and the defendant operated three clinics—one in Huntsville, one in Athens,
and one in Killen. Gayle was the only doctor in the practice. In 2019, the Killen
clinic shut down. By early 2020, the Athens clinic shut down. In March 2020, the
Alabama Medical Licensure Commission revoked Gayle’s license; subsequently the
Huntsville clinic shut down.

The Medicare Program (Medicare) is a federal health care program that
provides benefits to persons over the age of sixty-five and to qualifying persons with
disabilities. Medicare is administered by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS), a federal agency under the United States Department of Health and
Human Services.

The Alabama Medicaid Program (Medicaid) is a joint federal and state health
insurance program that provides free and below-cost insurance to low-income
individuals and families. It is administered by Alabama in coordination with CMS.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama (Blue Cross) is an entity that provides
private health insurance to individuals.

Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue ‘Cross are “health care benefit programs” as

Page 3 of 21 Defendant’s Initials sp-
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 4of21

defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 24(b). These plans and others
provide health benefits including for office visits and prescription drugs. Medicare

and Medicaid are “federal health care programs” as defined in Title 42, United States
Code, Section 1320a-7b(f).

The SBA is an executive branch agency of the United States government that
provides support to entrepreneurs and small businesses. The SBA enables and
provides for loans through banks, credit unions, and other lenders. These loans have
government-backed guarantees.

Intuit Financing Inc, is a lender that participated in the PPP program in 2020.
B. Health Care Fraud Conspiracy

Between at least 2015 and 2020, the defendant and Gayle conspired to commit
health care fraud by billing Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue Cross for services that
were not provided, including medical office visits billed as if Gayle was the
rendering provider when she was not.

1. Insurance Program Rules

Insurance programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue Cross, will pay
for certain medically reasonable and necessary services, such as office visits. When
claims are submitted to health care benefit programs, health care providers or their
designees are expected to use the proper identifier corresponding to the medical
service provided, as well as any appropriate modifiers to designate personnel who
performed the visit. Services provided by nurses or other medical staff may be
reimbursed by health care benefit programs at a lower rate than services provided by
_ physicians.

Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue Cross require health care providers enrolled
with their programs to maintain complete and accurate patient medical records
reflecting the medical assessment and diagnoses of their patients, as well as records
documenting actual treatment of the patients to whom services were provided and
for whom claims for payment were submitted by the physician or other health care
provider. These records are required to be sufficient to permit the programs to review
the appropriateness of payments made to the health care provider.

Claims submitted for payment under Medicare, Medicaid, or Blue Cross must

Page 4 ef'2) Defendant’s Initials sp
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page5of21

be billed under the name and national provider identifier (NPI) of the physician,
nurse practitioner, or physician assistant who actually rendered the service (or who
directly supervised an employee’s provision of such a service).

It is important that providers include accurate NPI information on the claims
they submit to Medicare, Medicaid, and BCBS, because claims submitted with
physician NPIs are generally eligible for higher reimbursement rates than claims
submitted with nurse practitioner NPIs.

2, Health Care Fraud

Gayle and the defendant conspired to and did willfully violate these insurance
program rules. For several years, their three-clinic medical practice fraudulently
billed insurance programs for millions of dollars in office visit claims using Gayle’s
NPI, as if Gayle had seen the patients—even when she had not seen the patients and
was not in the same building or even in the same town. Between 2015 and 2020,
none of the three clinics billed any office visits to Medicare or Medicaid under any
NPI besides Gayle’s. Between 2015 and mid-2019, none of the clinics billed any
office visits to Blue Cross under any NPI besides Gayle’s.

Gayle and the defendant lanew that their billing scheme was fraudulent. In
2015, Blue Cross audited Gayle’s Huntsville clinic and discovered that Gayle was
not present and other staff were seeing patients. Blue Cross informed Gayle that
services provided by nurse practitioners must be billed under the nurse practitioners’
provider numbers—not Gayle’s. Gayle and Blue Cross met in November 2015 to
discuss the audit findings, and Gayle admitted that the false billing under her
provider number was a concern and would stop. It did not stop. Gayle and the
defendant also signed insurance program documents certifying that they would
comply with insurance program rules and acknowledging that falsification or
concealment of material facts could be prosecuted under federal law. In addition,
employees warned that Gayle and the defendant should not be billing insurance
programs for doctor office visits that Gayle had not conducted.

Still, Gayle and the defendant continued to cause the practice to bill Medicare,
Medicaid, and Blue Cross for doctor office visits that Gayle had not conducted—
including on days when Gayle was traveling outside the state.

In total, between 2015 and 2020, Medicare, Medicaid, and Blue Cross paid
more than $2.3 million for office visits billed under Gayle’s NPI. Medicare alone

Page 5 of 21 Defendant's Initials sp
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 Filed 06/05/24 Page 6of 21

paid more than $1 million for such claims.
C. Wire Fraud Conspiracy

In about 2020—months after Gayle’s medical license had been revoked and
the defendant and Gayle’s medical practice was shutting down—the defendant and
Gayle conspired to defraud the United States Small Business Administration and
financial institutions. Specifically, the defendant and Gayle used false promises and
misrepresentations to obtain funds intended to stabilize businesses struggling
because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and then used those funds for other purposes.

1. COVID-19 Disaster Relief Programs

In March 2020, the President of the United States declared the COVID-19
pandemic to be a nationwide disaster. On March 27, 2020, the President signed The
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act into law.

The CARES Act, along with the Coronavims Preparedness and Response
Supplemental Appropriations Act, authorized the SBA to extend Economic Injury
Disaster Loans (EJDLs) 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. The amount of any advance
was determined by the number of employees on the borrower’s payroll. The
advances did not have to be repaid.

The CARES Act also created the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which
authorized the SBA to guarantee loans of up to $10 mullion to qualifying employers
without collateral or personal guarantees from the borrowers. The PPP was designed
to provide a direct incentive for smal! businesses to keep their workers on payroll.
The CARES Act required lenders making loans under the PPP to defer all repayment
obligations for not less than six months on such loans and required borrowers to
certify, among other things, that the borrowed “funds [would] be used to retain
workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage payments, lease payments, and
utility payments.”

To obtain EIDL or PPP funds, an applicant was required to provide personal

identifying information and information about the subject business’s operations,
such as the number of employees and past revenues. Applicants were also required

Page 6 of 21 Defendant’s Initials S_P-
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 7 of 21

to make certain good-faith certifications. For example, the PPP application required
the applicant to certify that economic uncertainty necessitated the loan request to
support ongoing business operations, and that the PPP funds would be used for
payroll, rent, utilities, and mortgage payments. The EIDL application required the
applicant to certify that it would use the loan proceeds solely as working capital to
alleviate economic injury caused by the pandemic.

Zz. Wire Fraud

In June 2020, the defendant and Gayle conspired to fraudulently obtain PPP
and EIDL funds, intended for businesses struggling from the COVID-19 pandemic—
even though Gayle’ s medical license had been revoked and their medical practice
was shutting down. The defendant and Gayle caused applications to be submitted
for both PPP and EIDL relief. The defendant and Gayle were aware that the funds
were required to be used for authorized purposes, such as payroll, utilities, and other
ongoing expenses.of the medical practice. The defendant and Gayle certified that
they would use the funds for those purposes. The defendant and Gayle knew that
they would not use the funds for those purposes.

The PPP application was submitted to Intuit Financing Inc. through a platform
within the medical practice’s QuickBooks application. The application was e-signed
by “SCHARA DAVIS.” The application listed drfrangayle@gmail.com as the email
address contact for the business, and Davis as the owner. The bank account
information. was for Complete Medical Health’s operating account (x243) at
Redstone Federal Credit Union. The application included certifications that
“{c]urrent economic uncertainty makes this loan request necessary to support the
ongoing operations of the Applicant,” and that “[t]he funds will be used to retain
workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments,
and utility payments, as specified under the Paycheck Protection Program Rule; I
understand that if the funds are knowingly used for unauthorized purposes, the
federal government may hold me legally liable, such as for charges of fraud.”

The EIDL application was submitted online directly to the SBA. The intake
application listed drfrangayle@gmail.com as the email contact and the owner as
Davis. It listed the same bank account information as in the PPP application. An
EIDL loan'agreement was submitted the following week, signed using DocuSign by
Schara Davis on behalf of Complete Medical. The agreement certified that the
borrower would use “all the proceeds of this Loan solely as working capital to
alleviate economic injury caused by disaster occurring in the month of January 31,

Page 7 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Sb-
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 8 of 21

2020 and continuing thereafter.” The agreement stated that whoever “wrongfully
misapplies the proceeds of an SBA disaster loan” may face civil liability and
criminal liability. The agreement was DocuSigned by the defendant.

The Complete Medical Health account x243 received both PPP and EIDL
funds in June 2020: first, an EIDL electronic deposit of $9,000 on about June 23;
second, a PPP electronic deposit of $294,730 on about June 25; and third, an EIDL
deposit of $149,900 on about June 26. Each of the three transactions included an
interstate wire transmission. These amounts were promptly transferred to the
practice’s payroll account, also at Redstone Federal Credit Union. In the succeeding
months, the defendant and Gayle used the funds for unauthorized purposes.

D. Venue

The events described below occurred in the Northern District of Alabama.
Venue is proper in this district.

The defendant hereby stipulates that the facts stated above are
substantially correct and that the Court can use these facts in calculating the
defendant’s sentence. The defendant further acknowledges that these facts do
not constitute all of the evidence of each and every act that the defendant and/or
any co-conspirators may have committed.

SC

Hi. RECOMMENDED SENTENCE
Subject to the limitations in section VII regarding subsequent conduct and
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(B), the Government will recommend the
following disposition:
A. That the defendant be awarded a two-level reduction in the defendant’s
adjusted offense level, based upon the defendant’s apparent prompt

recognition and affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility for
the defendant’s criminal conduct. The Goverment agrees to make a

Page 8 of 21 Defendant’s Initials >)
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 9 of 21

- motion pursuant to USSG §3E1.1(b) for an additional one-level
decrease in recognition of the defendant’s prompt notification to the
Govemment of the intention to enter a plea of guilty. The Government
may oppose any adjustment for acceptance of responsibility if the
defendant: (1) fails to admit each and every item in the factual
stipulation; (2) denies involvement in the offense; (3) gives conflicting
statements about the defendant’s involvement in the offense; (4) is
untruthful with the Court, the Government, or the United States
Probation Officer; (5) obstructs or attempts to obstruct justice prior to
sentencing; (6) engages in any criminal conduct between the date of
this agreement and the date of sentencing; or (7) attempts to withdraw
the defendant’s plea of guilty for any reason other than those expressly
enumerated in the “Waiver of Right to Appeal and Post-Conviction
Relief’ section of this Plea Agreement;

B. That the defendant be remanded to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons
and incarcerated for a term consistent with the low end of the advisory
United States Sentencing Guideline range as calculated by the Court at
the time of sentencing;:

C. That following the said term of imprisonment, the defendant be placed
on supervised release for a period to be determined by the Court, subject
to the Court’s standard conditions of supervised release and the
following special condition: not work in a job that involves billing
health care insurance programs;

D. That the defendant be required to pay restitution to all the victims of the
defendant’s crimes as determined by the Court;

E. That the defendant be required to pay a fine in accordance with the
Sentencing Guidelines should the Court determine that the defendant
has the ability to pay a fine, said amount due and owing as of the date
sentence is pronounced, with any outstanding balance to be paid in full
by the expiration of the term of supervised release;

F. _‘ That the defendant be required to comply with the forfeiture provisions
set forth in section XII of this agreement; and

G. That the defendant pay a special assessment of $200, said amount due

Page 9 of 21 Defendant's Initials SD
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 10 of 21

and owing as of the date sentence is pronounced.

IV. WAIVERS

A. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WAIVER

In consideration of the recommended disposition of this case, I, SCHARA
MONIQUE DAVIS, hereby understand, adlennwletee, and agree that if this
plea agreement is set aside for any reason, I will not assert any defense based
on any applicable statute of limitations or the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C.
§ 3161, et seg., that includes the passage of time from and including the date of
this plea agreement until and including the date of entry of any order setting
this plea agreement aside.

B. RIGHT TO APPEAL AND POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

In consideration of the recommended disposition of this case, I, SCHARA
MONIQUE DAVIS, hereby waive and give up my right to appeal my conviction
and/or sentence in this case, as well as any fines, restitution, and forfeiture
orders, the Court might impose. Further, I waive and give up the right to
challenge my conviction and/or sentence, any fines, restitution, forfeiture
orders imposed or the manner in which my conviction and/or sentence, any
fines, restitution, and forfeiture orders were determined in any post-conviction
proceeding, including, but not limited to, a motion brought under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255, and any argument that (1) the statute(s) to which I am pleading guilty

Page 10 of 23 Defendant’s ‘nttiate SO
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 11 of 21

is or are unconstitutional or (2) the admitted conduct does not fall within the
scope of the statute(s).

The defendant reserves the right to contest in an appeal or post-
conviction proceeding(s) the following:

1. Any sentence imposed in excess of the applicable statutory
maximum sentence(s);

2. Any sentence imposed in excess of the Guidelines range
determined by the Court at the time sentence is imposed; and

3. Ineffective assistance of counsel.

The defendant acknowledges that before giving up these rights, the
defendant discussed the United States Sentencing Guidelines and their
application to the defendant’s case with the defendant’s atforney, who
explained them to the defendant’s satisfaction. The defendant further
acknowledges and understands that the Government retains its right to appeal —
where authorized by statute.

I, SCHARA MONIQUE DAVIS, hereby place my signature on the line
directly below to signify that I fully understand the foregoing paragraphs, and

that I am knowingly and voluntarily entering into this waiver.

SCHARA MONIQUE/DAVIS

Page 11 of 21 Defendant’s initials. LY
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 12 of 21.

V. UNITED STATES SENTENCING GUIDELINES

The defendant’s counsel has explained to the defendant, that in light of the
United States Supreme Court’s decision in United States v, Booker, the federal
sentencing guidelines are advisory in nature, Sentencing is in the Court’s discretion
and is not required to be within the guideline range. The defendant agrees that,
pursuant to this agreement, the Court may use facts it finds by a preponderance of
the evidence to reach an advisory guideline range, and the defendant explicitly
waives any right to have those facts found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Vi. AGREEMENT NOT BINDING ON COURT

The defendant fully and completely understands and agrees that it is the
Court’s duty to impose sentence upon the defendant and that any sentence
recommended by the Government is NOT BINDING UPON THE COURT, and
that the Court is not required to accept the Government’s recommendation. Further,
the defendant understands that if the Court does not accept the Government’s
recommendation, the defendant does not have the right to withdraw the guilty plea.

Vil. VOIDING OF AGREEMENT

The defendant understands that if the defendant (a) violates any federal, state,
or local law or any condition of pretrial release after entering into this plea
agreement, (b) moves the Court to accept a plea of guilty in accordance with, or

pursuant to, the provisions of North Carolina y. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970),

Pago 12 of 21 Deiendant’s Initials Se
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 13 of 21

(c) tenders a plea of nolo contendere to the charges, (d) violates any other term of
this plea agreement, and/or (e) does or says anything that is inconsistent with the
acceptance of responsibility, the plea agreement will become NULL and VOID at
the election of the United States, and the United States will not be bound by any of
the terms, conditions, or recommendations, express or implied, which are contained
herein. Further, such election will not entitle the defendant to withdraw a previously
entered plea.
Vill. OTHER DISTRICTS AND JURISDICTIONS
The defendant understands and agrees that this agreement DOES NOT BIND
any other United States Attorney in any other district, or any other state or local
authority.
IX. © COLLECTION OF FINANCIAL OBLIGATION
In order to facilitate the collection of financial obligations to be imposed in
connection with this prosecution, the defendant agrees to:
e fully disclose all assets in which the defendant has any interest or over which
the defendant exercises control, directly or indirectly, including those held by
a spouse, nominee or other third party;
© promptly submit a completed financial statement to the United States
Attorney’s Office, in a form that it provides and as it directs;

© identify all assets over which the defendant exercises or exercised control,

Page 13 of 21 Defendant’s Initials > b :
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 Filed 06/05/24. Page 14 of 21

directly or indirectly, within the past five years, or in which the defendant has

or had during that time any financial interest;

e takeall steps as requested by the Government to obtain from any other parties
by any lawful means any records of assets owned at any time by the defendant;

e undergo any polygraph examination the Government may choose to
administer concerning such assets and to provide and/or consent to the release
of the defendant’s tax returns for the previous five years.

The defendant further agrees that the above information, as well as any of the
defendant’s financial statements and disclosures, will be complete, accurate, and
truthful. Finally, the defendant expressly authorizes the United States Attorney’s
Office to obtain a credit report on the defendant in order to evaluate the defendant’s
ability to satisfy any financial obligation imposed by the Court.

Xx. AGREEMENT REGARDING RELEVANT CONDUCT AND
RESTITUTION

As part of the defendant’s plea agreement, the defendant admits to the above
facts associated with the charges and releyant conduct for any other acts. The
defendant understands and agrees that the relevant conduct contained in the factual
basis will be used by the Court to determine the defendant’s range of punishment
under the advisory sentencing guidelines. The defendant admits that all of the crimes

listed in the factual basis are part of the same acts, scheme, and course of conduct.

Page 14 of 21 Defendant’s tail, 2
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 15 of 21

This agreement is not meant, however, to prohibit the United States Probation Office
or the Court from considering any other acts and factors, which may constitute or
relate to relevant conduct. Additionally, if this agreement contains any provisions
providing for the dismissal of any counts, the defendant agrees to pay any
appropriate restitution to each of the separate and proximate victims related to those
counts should there be any and waives objection to the inclusion of that restitution
in any order issued by the Court.

XI. TAX, F ORFEITURE AND OTHER CIVIL/ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDINGS

Unless otherwise specified herein, the defendant understands and
acknowledges that this agreement does not apply to or in any way limit any pending
or prospective proceedings related to the defendant’s tax liabilities, if any, or to any
pending or prospective forfeiture or other civil or administrative proceedings.

XIl. FORFEITURE

The. defendant agrees to consent to the immediate entry of a final order of
forfeiture against the defendant, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(]), in the
amount of $226,815, which represents proceeds the defendant personally obtained,
controlled, and benefitted from as a result of the offense alleged in Count 16 of the
superseding indictment and to which the defendant is indicating the defendant’s

desire to plead guilty by way of this written Plea Agreement. For purposes of

Page 15 of 21 Defendant’s Initials, Sb
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 16 of 21

entering said order of forfeiture, the defendant aclnowledges that a nexus exists
between said amount and the criminal offense to which the defendant is pleading
guilty.

The defendant acknowledges that if, due to an act or omission of the
defendant, directly forfeitable property: (i) cannot be located upon the exercise of
due diligence; (ii) have been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;
(iii) have been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court; (iv) have been
substantially diminished in value; or (v) have been commingled with other property
which cannot be divided without difficulty, as a result, the Government is authorized
under law to seek the forfeiture of any and all assets of the defendant as substitute
assets for the purpose of satisfying the final order of forfeiture until same is satisfied
in full. As a result, the defendant consents to the forfeiture of any and all of the
defendant’s property up to the value of $226,815, representing proceeds the
defendant personally obtained, controlled, and benefitted from as a result of the
offense alleged in Count 16 of the superseding indictment.

The defendant agrees to take all steps as requested by the Government to pass
clear title to forfeitable assets to the Government, and to testify truthfully in any
judicial forfeiture proceeding. The defendant hereby waives the requirements of Fed.
R. Crim. P. 32.2 regarding notice of the forfeiture in the superseding indictment,

announcement of the forfeiture at sentencing, and incorporation of the forfeiture in

Page 16 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Sb
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 17 of 21

the judgment. The defendant also waives the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 43(a)
with respect to the imposition of any forfeiture sanction carried out in accordance
with this plea agreement. The defendant acknowledges that the defendant
understands that the forfeiture of assets is part of the sentence that may be imposed
in this case and waives any failure by the Court to advise the defendant of this,
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1)(J), at the time the defendant’s guilty plea is
accepted,

The defendant further waives all constitutional and statutory challenges in any
manner (including direct appeal, habeas corpus, or any other means) to any forfeiture
carried out in accordance with this plea agreement on any grounds, including any
Double Jeopardy challenges that the defendant may have to the entry of a Forfeiture
Order before sentencing, and any claims, defenses or challenges arising under the
Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment resulting from the forfeiture
imposed as a result of this superseding indictment and/or any pending or completed
administrative or civil forfeiture actions based upon the course of conduct that
provides the factual basis for the forfeiture.

Non-Abatement of Criminal Forfeiture

The defendant agrees that the forfeiture provisions of this plea agreement are
intended to, and will, survive the defendant, notwithstanding the abatement of any

underlying criminal conviction after the execution of this agreement. The

Pago 17 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Sb-
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 18 of 21

forfeitability of any particular property pursuant to this agreement shall be
determined as if the defendant had survived, and that determination shall be binding
upon the defendant’s heirs, successors, and assigns until the agreed forfeiture,
including any agreed money judgment amount, is collected in full. To the extent that
forfeiture pursuant to this agreement requires the defendant to disgorge wrongfully
obtained criminal proceeds for the benefit of the defendant’s victims, the defendant
agrees that the forfetiare is primarily remedial in nature.
XII. IMMIGRATION STATUS

The defendant recognizes that pleading guilty may have consequences with
respect to the defendant’s immigration status if the defendant is not a citizen of the
United States. Under federal law, a broad range of crimes are removable offenses,
including the offense(s) to which the defendant is pleading guilty. The defendant’s
guilty plea and conviction make it practically inevitable and a virtual certainty that
the defendant will be removed or deported from the United States if the defendant is
not a citizen of the United States. Removal and other immigration consequences are
the subject of a separate proceeding, however; and the defendant understands that
no one, including his attorney or the district court, can predict to a certainty the effect
of his conviction on his immigration status. Understanding all of this, the defendant

nevertheless affirms that the defendant wants to plead guilty regardless of any

Page 18 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Sb
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 19 of 21

immigration consequences that plea may entail, even if the consequence is automatic
removal from the United States.
XIV. DEFENDANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I have read and understand the provisions of this plea agreement consisting of
21 pages. J have discussed the case and my constitutional and other rights with my
lawyer. I am satisfied with my lawyer’s representation in this case. I understand that
by pleading guilty, I will be waiving and giving up my right to continue to plead not
guilty, to a trial by jury, to the assistance of counsel at that trial, to confront, cross-
- examine, or compel the attendance of witnesses, to present evidence on my behalf,
to maintain my privilege against self-incrimination, and to the presumption of
innocence. I agree to enter my plea as indicated above on the terms and conditions
set forth herein.
NO PROMISES OR REPRESENTATIONS OTHER THAN THOSE IN
THE AGREEMENT HAVE BEEN MADE TO ME BY THE
PROSECUTOR, OR BY ANYONE ELSE, NOR HAVE ANY THREATS

BEEN MADE OR FORCE USED TO INDUCE ME TO PLEAD
GUILTY.

{ further state that I have not had any drugs, medication, or alcohol within the

past 48 hours except as stated here:

I understand that this plea agreement will take effect and will be binding as to

the Parties only after all necessary signatures have been affixed hereto,

Page 19 of 21 Defendant’s Initials ©
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 _ Filed 06/05/24 Page 20 of 21

T have personally and voluntarily placed my initials on every page of this plea
agreement and have signed the signature line below to indicate that I have read,
understand, and approve all of the provisions of this plea agreement, both

individually and as a total binding agreement.

DAT Dy SCHARA MONIQUE DAVIS

Defendant
XV. COUNSEL’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT

T have discussed this case with my client in detail and have advised my client
of all of my client’s rights and all possible defenses. My client has conveyed to me
that my client understands this plea agreement and consents to all its terms. I believe
the plea and disposition set forth herein are appropriate under the facts of this case
and are in accord with my best judgment. J concur in the entry of the plea agreement «
on the terms and conditions set forth herein.

DATE KATHY LUKER
Defendant’s Counsel

Page 20 of 21 Defendant’s Initials Shy
Case 5:22-cr-00113-LCB-HNJ Document 89 Filed 06/05/24 Page 21 of 21

XVI. GOVERNMENT’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have reviewed this matter and this plea agreement and concur that the plea

and disposition set forth herein are appropriate and are in the interests of justice.

PRIM F. ESCALONA

United States Attorney
DATE JOHN B. WARD

RYAN S. RUMMAGE
Assistant United States Attorneys

Page 21 of 21 Defendant’s Initials, Sb

(Revised June 2022)


File and source

File

89-plea-agreement-as-to-schara-monique-davis.pdf

Size

8,974,675 bytes

SHA-256

953e0aea7e94abfaf3bf616cf9bb229c5ffd95459a66f4a295a47048ebe40008

Our copy

89-plea-agreement-as-to-schara-monique-davis.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)