United States v. Joshua Lambert — Plea Agreement Letter, Southern District of West Virginia (Document 15)

Summary

A plea agreement letter dated January 19, 2024 from the United States Attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia to counsel Michael A. Davenport, filed March 7, 2024 as Document 15 in United States v. Joshua Lambert, Case 2:24-cr-00039. Lambert agrees to waive indictment and plead guilty to a single-count information charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, with a maximum of 5 years' imprisonment, a fine of $250,000 and 3 years of supervised release. Lambert agrees to restitution of $10,616, cooperation under use immunity, and waivers of appeal, collateral attack and FOIA rights. The parties calculate a base offense level of 6, plus 2 for a loss greater than $6,500, for an adjusted offense level of 8. The attached stipulation of facts states that Lambert, while incarcerated at USP Big Sandy, received UC benefits for 32 consecutive weeks through false weekly certifications.

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.

Document 15 Filed 03/07/24 Page 1 of 16 PagelD #: 27
United States Department of Justice

United States Attorney
Southern District of West Virginia

Robert C. Byrd United States Courthouse 1-800-659-8726
300 Virginia Street, East 304-345-2200
Suite 4000 FAX: 304-347-5104
Charleston, WV 25301
January 19, 2024
Michael A. Davenport, Esq. ROAY L. PERRY 1, CLES
US. District C
PO Box 147 Soutnem Bistnct ot West Virgin

West Hamlin, WV 25571-0147

Re: United States v. Joshua Lambert
Criminal No. QiQytr- 34 (USDC SDWV)

Dear Mr. Davenport:

This will confirm our conversations with regard to your
client, Joshua Lambert (hereinafter “Mr. Lambert”). As a result
of these conversations, it is agreed by and between the United
States and Mr. Lambert as follows:

1. CHARGING AGREEMENT. Mr. Lambert agrees to waive his
right pursuant to Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
to be charged by indictment and will consent to the filing of a
Single-count information to be filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, a copy of which
is attached hereto as “Plea Agreement Exhibit A.”

2s RESOLUTION OF CHARGES. Mr. Lambert will plead guilty
to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy to steal public
money, property or records) as charged in said information.

3. MAXIMUM POTENTIAL PENALTY. The maximum penalty to which
Mr. Lambert will be exposed by virtue of this guilty plea is as
follows:

(a) Imprisonment for a period of 5 years;

(b) A fine of $250,000, or twice the gross pecuniary gain or

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 Filed 03/07/24 Page 2 of 16 PagelD #: 28

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 2

twice the gross pecuniary loss resulting from
defendant’s conduct, whichever is greater;

(c) A term of supervised release of 3 years;

(d) A mandatory special assessment of $100 pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3013 [; and

(e) An order of restitution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663
and 3664, or as otherwise set forth in this plea
agreement.

4, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. Prior to the entry of a plea
pursuant to this plea agreement, Mr. Lambert will tender a check
or money order to the Clerk of the United States District Court
for $100, which check or money order shall indicate on its face

the name of defendant and the case number. The sum received by
the Clerk will be applied toward the special assessment imposed by
the Court at sentencing. Mr. Lambert will obtain a receipt of

payment from the Clerk and will tender a copy of such receipt to
the United States, to be filed with the Court as an attachment to
this plea agreement. If Mr. Lambert fails to provide proof of
payment of the special assessment prior to or at the plea
proceeding, the United States will have the right to void this
plea agreement. In the event this plea agreement becomes void
after payment of the special assessment, such sum shall be promptly
returned to Mr. Lambert.

5. RESTITUTION. Notwithstanding the offense of
conviction, Mr. Lambert agrees that he owes restitution in the
amount of $10,616 and agrees to pay such restitution, with interest
as allowed by law, to the fullest extent financially feasible. In
aid of restitution, Mr. Lambert further agrees as follows:

(a) Mr. Lambert agrees to fully assist the United States in
identifying and locating any assets to be applied toward
restitution and to give signed, sworn statements and
testimony concerning assets upon request of the United

JL

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 Filed 03/07/24 Page 3 of 16 PagelD #: 29

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 3

States.

(b) Mr. Lambert will fully complete and execute, under oath,
a Financial Statement and a Release of Financial
Information on forms supplied by the United States and
will return these completed forms to counsel for the
United States within seven calendar days from the date
of the signing of this plea agreement.

(c) Mr. Lambert agrees not to dispose of, transfer or
otherwise encumber any real or personal property which
he currently owns or in which he holds an interest,
including:

6. PAYMENT OF MONETARY PENALTIES. Mr. Lambert authorizes
the Financial Litigation Program in the United States Attorney’s
Office to obtain a credit report from any major credit reporting
agency prior to sentencing in order to assess his financial
condition for sentencing purposes. Mr. Lambert agrees not to
object to the District Court ordering all monetary penalties
(including the special assessment, fine, court costs, and any
restitution that does not exceed the amount set forth in this plea
agreement) to be due and payable in full immediately and subject
to immediate enforcement by the United States. So long as the
monetary penalties are ordered to be due and payable in full
immediately, Mr. Lambert further agrees not to object to the
District Court imposing any schedule of payments as merely a
minimum schedule of payments and not the only method, nor a
limitation on the methods, available to the United States to
enforce the judgment.

Mr. Lambert authorizes the United States, through the
Financial Litigation Program, to submit any unpaid criminal
monetary penalty to the United States Treasury for offset in
accordance with the Treasury Offset Program, regardless of the
defendant’s payment status or history at that time.

In addition to any payment ordered by the Court, Mr. Lambert

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 4 of 16 PagelD #: 30

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 4 \

shall pay all monies received from any source other than earned
income, including but not limited to, lottery winnings, gambling
proceeds, judgments, inheritances, and tax refunds, toward the
court ordered restitution or fine.

Mr. Lambert agrees that if he retains counsel or has appointed
counsel in response to the United States’ efforts to collect any
monetary penalty, he shall immediately notify the United States
Attorney’s Office, Attention: Financial Litigation Program, 300
Virginia Street E., Suite 4000, Charleston, West Virginia 25301,
in writing and shall instruct his attorney to notify FLP
immediately of his representation.

7. COOPERATION. Mr. Lambert will be forthright and
truthful with this office and other law enforcement agencies with
regard to all inquiries made pursuant to this agreement, and will
give signed, sworn statements and grand jury and trial testimony
upon request of the United States. In complying with this
provision, Mr. Lambert may have counsel present except when
appearing before a grand jury.

8. USE IMMUNITY. Unless this agreement becomes void due
to a violation of any of its terms by Mr. Lambert, and except as
expressly provided for in paragraph 10 below, nothing contained in
any statement or testimony provided by him pursuant to this
agreement, or any evidence developed therefrom, will be used
against him, directly or indirectly, in any further criminal
prosecutions or in determining the applicable guideline range
under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

Oo. LIMITATIONS ON IMMUNITY. Nothing contained in this
agreement restricts the use of information obtained by the United
States from an independent, legitimate source, separate and apart
from any information and testimony provided pursuant to this
agreement, in determining the applicable guideline range or in
prosecuting Mr. Lambert for any violations of federal or state
laws. The United States reserves the right to prosecute Mr.
Lambert for perjury or false statement if such a situation should

AL

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 5 of 16 PagelD #: 31

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 5

occur pursuant to this agreement.

10. STIPULATION OF FACTS AND WAIVER OF FED. R. EVID. 410.
The United States and Mr. Lambert stipulate and agree that the
facts comprising the offense of conviction include the facts
outlined in the “Stipulation of Facts,” a copy of which is attached
hereto as “Plea Agreement Exhibit B.”

Mr. Lambert agrees that if he withdraws from this agreement,
or this agreement is voided as a result of a breach of its terms
by him, and he is subsequently tried for his conduct alleged in
the information, as more specifically described in the Stipulation
of Facts, the United States may use and introduce the Stipulation
of Facts in the United States case-in-chief, in cross-examination
of Mr. Lambert or of any of his witnesses, or in rebuttal of any
testimony introduced by him or on his behalf. Mr. Lambert knowingly
and voluntarily waives, see United States v. Mezzanatto, 513 U.S.
196 (1995), any right he has pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 410 that
would prohibit such use of the Stipulation of Facts. If the Court
does not accept the plea agreement through no fault of the
defendant, or the Court declares the agreement void due to a breach
of its terms by the United States, the Stipulation of Facts cannot
be used by the United States.

The United States and Mr. Lambert understand and acknowledge
that the Court is not bound by the Stipulation of Facts and that
if some or all of the Stipulation of Facts is not accepted by the
Court, the parties will not have the right to withdraw from the
plea agreement.

11. AGREEMENT ON SENTENCING GUIDELINES. Based on the
foregoing Stipulation of Facts, the United States and Mr. Lambert
agree that the following provisions of the United States Sentencing
Guidelines apply to this case.

Count One of the Information:

USSG §2Bl1.1

a

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 6 of 16 PagelD #: 32

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.

January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 6
Base offense level 6
Loss greater than $6,500 +2
Adjusted offense level 8

The United States and Mr. Lambert acknowledge and understand
that the Court and the Probation Office are not bound by the
parties' calculation of the United States Sentencing Guidelines
set forth above and that the parties shall not have the right to
withdraw from the plea agreement due to a disagreement with the
Court's calculation of the appropriate guideline range.

12. WAIVER OF APPEAL AND COLLATERAL ATTACK. Mr. Lambert
knowingly and voluntarily waives his right to seek appellate review
of his conviction and of any sentence of imprisonment, fine, or
term of supervised release imposed by the District Court, or the
manner in which the sentence was determined, on any ground
whatsoever including any ground set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a),
except that the defendant may appeal any sentence that exceeds the
maximum penalty prescribed by statute. Mr. Lambert also knowingly
and voluntarily waives any right to seek appellate review of any
claim or argument that (1) the statute of conviction 18 U.S.C. §

| +34 is unconstitutional, and (2) Mr. Lambert conduct set forth in
the Stipulation of Facts (Plea Agreement Exhibit B) does not fall

Rot within the scope of the 18 U.S.C. § 4341.37} AJT We
An OSL The United States also agrees to waive its right to appeal
Se any sentence of imprisonment, fine, or term of supervised release

imposed by the District Court, or the manner in which the sentence
was determined, on any ground whatsoever, including any ground set
forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b), except that the United States may
appeal any sentence that is below the minimum penalty, if any,
prescribed by statute.

Mr. Lambert also knowingly and voluntarily waives the right
to challenge his guilty plea and conviction resulting from this

ML

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 Filed 03/07/24 Page 7 of 16 PagelD #: 33

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 7

plea agreement, and any sentence imposed for the conviction, in
any collateral attack, including but not limited to a motion
brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

The waivers noted above shall not apply to a post-conviction
collateral attack or direct appeal based on a claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel.

13. WAIVER OF FOIA AND PRIVACY RIGHT. Mr. Lambert knowingly
and voluntarily waives all rights, whether asserted directly or by
a representative, to request or receive from any department or
agency of the United States any records pertaining to the
investigation or prosecution of this case, including without any
limitation any records that may be sought under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, or the Privacy Act of 1974,
5 U.S.C. § 552a, following final disposition.

14. FINAL DISPOSITION. The matter of sentencing is within
the sole discretion of the Court. The United States has made no
representations or promises as to a specific sentence. The United
States reserves the right to:

(a) Inform the Probation Office and the Court of all relevant
facts and conduct;

(ob) Present evidence and argument relevant to the factors
enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a);

(c) Respond to questions raised by the Court;

(d) Correct inaccuracies or inadequacies in the presentence
report;

(e) Respond to statements made to the Court by or on behalf
of Mr. Lambert;

(f) Advise the Court concerning the nature and extent of Mr.

Lambert’s cooperation; and

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 ~ Filed 03/07/24 Page 8 of 16 PagelD #: 34

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.
January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert

Page 8

(g) Address the Court regarding the issue of Mr. Lambert’s
acceptance of responsibility.

15. VOIDING OF AGREEMENT. If either the United States or
Mr. Lambert violates the terms of this agreement, the other party
will have the right to void this agreement. If the Court refuses
to accept this agreement, it shall be void.

16. ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT. This written agreement
constitutes the entire agreement between the United States and Mr.
Lambert in this matter. There are no agreements, understandings

Or recommendations as to any other pending or future charges
against Mr. Lambert in any Court other than the United States
District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

Acknowledged and agreed to on behalf of the United States:

WILLIAM S. THOMPSON

pared States Attorney

/ a

ANDREW J. TESSMAN
Assistant United States Attorney

By:

AJT/fgc

I hereby acknowledge by my initials at the bottom of each of the
foregoing pages and by my signature on the last page of this 9-
page agreement that I have read and carefully discussed every part
of it with my attorney, that I understand the terms of this
agreement, and that I voluntarily agree to those terms and
conditions set forth in the agreement. I further acknowledge that
my attorney has advised me of my rights, possible defenses, the
Sentencing Guideline provisions, and the consequences of entering
into this agreement, that no promises or inducements have been
made to me other than those in this agreement, and that no one has

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 ~ Filed 03/07/24 Page 9 of 16 PagelD #: 35

Michael A. Davenport, Esq.

January 19, 2024 Re: Joshua Lambert
Page 9

threatened me or forced me in any way to enter into this agreement.
Finally, I am satisfied with the representation of my attorney in

Michael A. Dayénport, Esq. Date Signéd
Counsel for péfendant

Defendant’s
Initials
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 Filed 03/07/24 Page 10 of 16 PagelD #: 36

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHARLESTON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. CRIMINAL NO.
18 U.S.C. § 371
JOSHUA LAMBERT
INFORMATION

The United States Attorney charges:

From on or about September 28, 2020, and continuing through on or about May 9, 2021,
in St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia and within the Sothern District of West Virginia
and elsewhere, defendant, JOSHUA LAMBERT and a person known to the United States Attorney
(“Known Person One”), knowingly and intentionally conspired to commit a violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 641, that is, to knowingly and willfully embezzle, steal, purloin, and convert to his own use and
the use of another, on a recurring basis, money belonging to the United States and a department
and agency thereof in a total amount greater than $1,000, namely, unemployment compensation
benefits having a value of approximately $10,616.

BACKGROUND

At all relevant times:

l. Defendant JOSHUA LAMBERT was incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary
located at Big Sandy in Inez, Kentucky.

2. Known Person One was a resident of St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia.

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 - Filed 03/07/24 Page 11 of 16 PagelD #: 37

3. WorkForce West Virginia was a division of the West Virginia Department of
Commerce that was funded through the United States Department of Labor. WorkForce West
Virginia administered an unemployment compensation program in the state of West Virginia.

4. Once the initial application for unemployment compensation benefits (“UC
benefits”) was approved, the claimant was required to certify their continued eligibility for benefits
every week. The claimant was required to answer several questions, including, but not limited to:
(1) whether the UC claimant had worked during the certification period; (2) whether the claimant
was able to work; (3) whether the claimant was available for work; and (4) whether the claimant
was actively looking for work during the certification period.

5. In March of 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government
enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act. The CARES Act,
among other things, provided additional flexibility and funding for state UC agencies, including
WorkForce West Virginia.

6. The Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (“FPUC”) program was a
temporary UC benefits program created by the CARES Act. FPUC originally provided individuals
that received approved UC benefits with an additional $600 per week in federal funds. In
December of 2020, Congress reauthorized FPUC at a lesser amount of $300 per week and
concluded the program in September 2021.

OVERT ACTS OF THE CONSPIRACY

7. In furtherance of the conspiracy and to achieve its objectives, defendant JOSHUA
LAMBERT and Known Person One committed the following overt acts at various times between
September 28, 2020, and May 9, 2021, at or near St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia, and

within the Southern District of West Virginia and elsewhere:

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 12 of 16 PagelD #: 38

8. Defendant JOSHUA LAMBERT called Known Person One by telephone and
directed Known Person One to access the Workforce West Virginia website and falsely certify
each week, for thirty-two consecutive weeks, that defendant JOSHUA LAMBERT was entitled to
UC benefits, even though defendant JOSHUA LAMBERT was not able, available, and seeking
full-time work.

9. From her home computer in St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia, Known
Person One falsely certified that defendant JOSH LAMBERT was entitled to UC benefits on each
of the following dates:

September 28, 2020
October 4, 2020
October 11, 2020
October 19, 2020
October 25, 2020
November 1, 2020
November 9, 2020
November 15, 2020
November 23, 2020
November 30, 2020
December 7, 2020
December 21, 2020
December 28, 2020
January 3, 2021
January 11, 2021
January 18, 2021
January 24, 2021
February 1, 2021
February 8, 2021
February 14, 2021
February 22, 2021
March 1, 2021
March 8, 2021
March 14, 2021
March 21, 2021
March 29, 2021
April 4, 2021

April 12, 2021
April 19, 2021
April 25, 2021

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Documenti5- Filed 03/07/24 Page 13 of 16 PagelD #: 39

May 2, 2021
May 9, 2021

10. Known Person One electronically deposited portions of the funds into defendant
JOSHUA LAMBERT’s prison commissary account.

11. Defendant JOSHUA LAMBERT accessed the stolen funds in his prison commissary
account transmitted by Known Person One to make purchases to benefit himself while
incarcerated.

In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.

WILLIAMS S. THOMPSON
United States Attorney

ANDREW TESSMAN
Assistant United States Attorney

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 14 of 16 PagelD #: 40

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHARLESTON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Vv. CRIMINAL NO.
JOSHUA LAMBERT
STIPULATION OF FACTS

The United States and Joshua Lambert (hereinafter “defendant” and “I” and “me” and
“my”) stipulate and agree that the facts comprising the offense of conviction and the relevant
conduct include the following:!
BACKGROUND

1. The state of West Virginia operated an Unemployment Compensation (“UC”)
program that provided temporary income support to individuals unemployed through no fault of
their own or individuals who were working less than their full-time hours.

2. WorkForce West Virginia was a division of the West Virginia Department of
Commerce that was funded through the United States Department of Labor. WorkForce West
Virginia administered the UC program in the state of West Virginia.

3. Those seeking UC benefits in West Virginia submitted online applications to
WorkForce West Virginia. Applicants had to answer specific questions to establish eligibility to
receive UC benefits, including their name, Social Security Number (SSN), and mailing address,
among other things. WorkForce West Virginia relied upon the information in the application to
determine UC benefits eligibility.

4. If WorkForce West Virginia approved a claim, the claimant could choose to receive
UC benefits by direct deposit or via debit card.

5. WorkForce West Virginia funded approved UC benefits using Key Bank, a
financial institution as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 20, and headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio.

6. All claimants that chose the debit card option would be mailed a Key Bank debit
card with the claimant’s name on it based upon information received from WorkForce West
Virginia.

7. Once the initial application for UC benefits was approved, the claimant was
required to certify their continued eligibility for benefits every week. The certification process
occurred via the internet. The claimant was required to answer several questions, including, but

' This Stipulation of Facts does not contain every fact known to defendant Joshua Lambert and to
the United States concerning his involvement in the charges set forth in the Indictment and her
relevant conduct.

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15- Filed 03/07/24 Page 15 of 16 PagelD #: 41

not limited to: (1) whether the UC claimant had worked during the certification period; (2) whether
the claimant was able to work; (3) whether the claimant was available for work; and (4) whether
the claimant was actively looking for work during the certification period.

8. WorkForce West Virginia authorized continued UC benefits to a claimant based on
the claimant’s self-certified eligibility. If WorkForce West Virginia authorized the benefits, Key
Bank initiated a direct deposit into the claimant’s bank account or loaded funds on to the claimant’s
previously provided debit card depending on the claimant’s election.

9. In March of 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government
enacted the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act. The CARES Act,
among other things, provided additional flexibility and funding for state UC agencies, including
WorkForce West Virginia.

10. The Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (“FPUC”) program was a
temporary UC benefits program created by the CARES Act. FPUC originally provided individuals
that received approved UC benefits with an additional $600 per week in federal funds. In
December of 2020, Congress reauthorized FPUC at a lesser amount of $300 per week and
concluded the program in September 2021.

THE OFFENSE CONDUCT

11. I applied for UC benefits on or about June 10, 2020. My application for benefits
was approved and I legitimately received UC benefits from on or about June 13, 2020, to the week
ending September 21, 2020.

12. I was incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary located at Big Sandy in Inez,
Kentucky (“USP Big Sandy”) from on or about September 28, 2020, until my release from prison
on or about April 8, 2022. During the time of my incarceration, I continued to draw UC benefits.

13. From at least September 2020 through at least May 2021, I knowingly applied for
and received more than $10,616 in UC benefits from the state of West Virginia and the federal
government. I knew I was not entitled to receive the funds because I was incarcerated and
unavailable to work.

14. I conspired with my mother, L.D., to access the Workforce West Virginia website
for thirty-two consecutive weeks after I was incarcerated USP Big Sandy. I conspired with my
mother, L.D., to falsely certify each week that I was entitled to UC benefits, even though I knew
that I was not able, available, and seeking full-time work. In furtherance of the conspiracy, I
instructed L.D. to submit false answers from her home computer in St. Albans, West Virginia.
Workforce West Virginia relied on the false answers and approved funding for UC benefits to my
Key Bank card every week. Despite knowing that I was not entitled to the UC benefits, I continued
to use these funds to make personal purchases.

15. Based on my false weekly unemployment certifications, I received weekly UC
benefits for 32 consecutive weeks aggregating more than $10,616, which included supplementary
funds provided by the FPUC program.

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B
2
Case 2:24-cr-00039 Document15 _ Filed 03/07/24 Page 16 of 16 PagelD #: 42

16. Based on my materially false representations, WorkForce West Virginia approved
the weekly certifications and authorized payments of UC benefits to my Key Bank debit card. In
furtherance of the conspiracy, L.D. would electronically deposit portions of the funds from her
home computer in St. Albans, West Virginia into my prison commissary account in Inez, Kentucky
via the jail.atm.com website. I proceeded to use these funds to make purchases to benefit myself
while incarcerated.

ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS

17. I stipulate and agree that I owe $10,616 in restitution.
18. The United States and I also agree that St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia

is located within the Southern District of West Virginia.

Stipulated and agreed to:

WA Lf Lod

AOSAU) LAMBER

MICHAEL A:\DAVENPORT, ESQ. Date
Defendant’s Attorney

ANDREW TESSMAN Date
Assistant United States Attorney

PLEA AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B
3


File and source

File

15-plea-agreement.pdf

Size

4,119,162 bytes

SHA-256

d3b572bd8f4886a26aa8b4f5405e458b57ef5175acf3eb1572ba04dbc6db40fa

Our copy

15-plea-agreement.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)