United States v. Jennifer Pamela Izzo — Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (S.D. Fla., Document 45)

Summary

A Preliminary Order of Forfeiture in United States v. Jennifer Pamela Izzo, Case No. 22-CR-60155-ROSENBERG, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket March 1, 2023; the signature block names United States District Judge Robin L. Rosenberg. The order recites that the Court accepted the Defendant's guilty plea to Counts 1, 6, and 8 of the Indictment on December 20, 2022, and that the Defendant agreed to a forfeiture money judgment of $94,500. Quoting the Factual Proffer, it states that the Defendant, a financial bookkeeper for Company 1, created fictitious PayPal and Intuit vendor accounts and made unauthorized credit card payments to them from in or around October 2019 through in or around April 2020, totaling approximately $94,500. The order enters a forfeiture money judgment of $94,500 under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C).

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

Case 0:22-cr-60155-MD Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2023 Page 1 of 4




                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                            SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                            CASE NO. 22-CR-60155-ROSENBERG

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 vs.

 JENNIFER PAMELA IZZO,

       Defendant.
 _______________________________/

                         PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE

        THIS MATTER is before the Court upon motion of the United States of America (the

 “United States”) for entry of a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (“Motion”) against Defendant

 JENNIFER PAMELA IZZO (the “Defendant”).               The Court has considered the Motion, is

 otherwise advised in the premises, and finds as follows:

        On July 14, 2022, a federal grand jury returned an Indictment charging the Defendant in

 Counts 1-7 with wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, among other counts. Indictment,

 ECF No. 1. The Indictment also contained forfeiture allegations, which alleged that upon

 conviction of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, the Defendant shall forfeit any property, real or

 personal, which constitutes or derived from proceeds traceable to a violation. See id. at 5.

        On December 20, 2022, the Court accepted the Defendant’s guilty plea to Counts 1,6, and

 8 of the Indictment. See Minute Entry, ECF No. 27; Plea Agreement ¶ 1, ECF No. 28. As part of

 the guilty plea, the Defendant agreed to the entry of a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of

 $94,500. See Plea Agreement ¶10.
Case 0:22-cr-60155-MD Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2023 Page 2 of 4




        In support of the guilty plea, the Defendant executed a Factual Proffer, and the Court found

 that there was a factual basis to support the Defendant’s conviction. See Factual Proffer, ECF No.

 29. The Factual Proffer also provided a basis for the forfeiture of property. See id. at 2.

        In or around August 2019, E.G. hired the Defendant to be the financial bookkeeper for

 Company 1. Factual Proffer at 1. Among her duties and responsibilities, the Defendant oversaw

 the repayment of vendor invoices, maintained accounts payable, and managed the balances and

 payments made using the company’s credit cards—including the American Express and JPMorgan

 Chase credit cards issued in the names of individual employees (such as E.G. and R.G.). Id.

        In or around October 2019, the Defendant knowingly and intentionally devised an

 embezzlement scheme to defraud Company 1, including by creating fictitious vendor accounts, in

 order to make repeated and continuous unauthorized credit card transactions for her own financial

 benefit, all while concealing the true nature of the fictitious vendor accounts, which she controlled.

 Id.

        Namely, the Defendant used newly created email addresses to setup and authenticate two

 fictitious accounts through PayPal and Intuit, respectively, under the names of two real vendors

 with which Company 1 did business. Id. at 2. The Defendant then carried out many unauthorized

 credit card payments to her fictitious PayPal and Intuit accounts—which payments were reflected

 on the American Express and JPMorgan Chase statements as if they were payments to Company

 1’s real vendors. Id. And because American Express and JPMorgan Chase’s payments are routed

 through servers hosted in other states, all of the Defendant’s unauthorized payments caused wire

 transmissions from the Southern District of Florida to outside the State of Florida. Id. Thereafter,

 once the payments were completed, the Defendant transmitted the fraudulently obtained funds into

 the personal bank account belonging to her boyfriend. Id. Finally, the Defendant re-routed the




                                                   2
Case 0:22-cr-60155-MD Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2023 Page 3 of 4




 funds through Venmo—an electronic money transfer application—to her own personal checking

 account. Id.

        For example, on or about October 17, 2019, the Defendant made an unauthorized payment

 in the approximate amount of $125 to her fictitious PayPal account (ending in 8422), using the

 JPMorgan Chase credit card number (ending in 5167), issued in the name of R.G. Id.

        In sum, from in or around October 2019, through in or around April 2020—when she was

 terminated from Company 1—the Defendant carried out dozens of unauthorized credit card

 transactions, totaling approximately $94,500 in embezzled funds, which the Defendant ultimately

 received for her own personal use and benefit. Id.

        Based on the record in this case, the total value of the proceeds traceable to the offenses of

 conviction is $94,500, which sum may be sought as a forfeiture money judgment pursuant to Rule

 32.2 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

        Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the evidence in the record, and for good cause shown,

 the Motion is GRANTED, and it is hereby ORDERED that:

        1.      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and Rule 32.2 of the Federal Rules of

 Criminal Procedure, a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of $94,500 is hereby entered

 against the Defendant.

        2.      The United States is authorized to conduct any discovery that might be necessary

 to identify, locate, or dispose of forfeited property, and to resolve any third-party petition, pursuant

 to Rule 32.2(b)(3), (c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 21 U.S.C. § 853(m).

        3.      Pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this Order

 is final as to the Defendant.




                                                    3
Case 0:22-cr-60155-MD Document 45 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2023 Page 4 of 4




         4.    The Court shall retain jurisdiction in this matter for the purpose of enforcing this

 Order, and pursuant to Rule 32.2(e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, shall amend

 this Order, or enter other orders as necessary, to forfeit additional specific property when

 identified.

         DONE AND ORDERED in West Palm Beach, Florida, this 1st day of March 2023.



                                                     ____________________________________
                                                     Robin L. Rosenberg
                                                     UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE




                                                4


File and source

File

1-indictment-as-to-jennifer-pamela-izzo.pdf

Size

160,362 bytes

SHA-256

2895cad894e26531abff23dd622907795717742048ace573a759119a6241d874

Our copy

1-indictment-as-to-jennifer-pamela-izzo.pdf

Original

No public link identified.