Crandall Speights: Government’s Sentencing Memorandum (District of Delaware, September 11, 2025)
Summary
The Government's Sentencing Memorandum in United States of America v. Crandall Speights, Criminal Action No. 23-78, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, filed September 11, 2025 as Document 51. The government recommends a sentence of 87 months, at the top of the Guidelines range. It states that the defendant pled guilty to a scheme of stealing and altering checks from residential mailboxes and to wire fraud and money laundering offenses involving six fraudulent COVID-19 relief loans, and that the losses total approximately $949,010. It states that law enforcement seized jewelry appraised at approximately $477,705.00, fur items appraised at approximately $56,250 and $62,232 in cash, and it addresses the defendant's history and the need for deterrence. It is signed by Assistant United States Attorney Carly A. Hudson.
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
Cite this document
“Crandall Speights: Government’s Sentencing Memorandum (District of Delaware, September 11, 2025).”
Original at ecf.ded.uscourts.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/sentencing-memorandum-usa-v-speights-dkt-51-c096ea8789/
, SHA-256 a48d23cc1f50d8d3abfc76c88701e2ccea108e2fecd7f049ea1bf31b4b7c157e.Full text
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 132
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. )
) Criminal Action No. 23-78
CRANDALL SPEIGHTS, )
)
Defendant. )
GOVERNMENT’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
Crandall Speights has spent his entire adult life defrauding and stealing from
others. Beginning at age 21, from 2003 – 2019, he amassed fourteen convictions for
theft from vehicles, burglary, credit card-related fraud, identity theft, theft by
deception, and forgery. From 2019 - 2021, he committed one of the fraud schemes to
which he pled guilty here, stealing checks out of residential mailboxes, altering them,
and depositing them into accounts he controlled. From 2020 – 2021, Speights
committed the additional wire fraud and money laundering offenses to which he pled
guilty, by submitting six fraudulent COVID-19 relief loans, depositing the funds into
accounts he controlled, and moving the money to conceal its fraudulent nature. In
2024, while on supervised release in this matter, Speights fled to New Jersey and
continued stealing mail, amassing identification cards, and altering stolen checks.
Between the mail theft, COVID-19 relief fraud, and additional checks he stole while
on supervised release, Speights defrauded others out of approximately $949,010.
Speights has committed numerous fraudulent acts over the last 22 years with one
singular purpose: to enrich himself. While no motive excuses fraud, some motives
are particularly egregious. Speights spent his fraud proceeds on jewelry and furs.
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 133
His relentless pursuit of a luxurious lifestyle and total disregard for his victims
warrants a significant sentence. The government recommends a sentence of 87
months, at the top of the Guidelines range. 1
I. The Nature and Circumstances of the Offense
Speights’ fraudulent acts are myriad, span multiple years, and impacted
numerous victims. The Court is all to familiar with the ways that COVID-19 relief
fraud looted a program intended to aid small businesses struggling during the
pandemic. The Court is likewise familiar with the financial loss sustained by banks
when they fund checks which are later revealed to be fraudulent. The government
herein focuses on additional layers of harm Speights inflicted on others beyond those
most typically seen in a fraud case. These additional, atypical layers of harm have
guided the government’s recommendation of a sentence at the top of the Guidelines
range.
First, not all of the individuals whose checks were stolen out of their mailboxes
had their losses reimbursed by banks. Eight families or small businesses personally
sustained the loss of their stolen checks. PSR ¶ 32. Some of those losses were
particularly significant. J.D., for example, is an individual who personally lost
$101,453 due to Speights’ fraud. Id.
Second, those victims sustained not only financial loss, but loss of a sense of
safety. Speights’s scheme reached into the space where a person should feel most
secure – their homes. He drove around quiet neighborhoods at night looking for
raised flags on mailboxes, slowed down, reached in, and took whatever was inside.
1 The government includes Sealed Attachment A with this filing, as it does in all
cases.
2
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 134
When Speights found a particularly lucrative stack of mail, he returned to the same
home again. At least one victim family became so concerned by Speights’ repeat
drive-bys that they took videos of Speights’ car and provided them to law
enforcement. A still frame from one such video is below:
Speights admitted to stealing mail from this victim in his post-arrest statement. See
Ex. 1 (Speights Post-Arrest Statement) at 42.
Speights forced victims to live with the uncertainty of when he would return
and what he might do next. They had no way to know whether Speights was content
to loot their mailboxes or whether he would escalate to home invasion – a reasonable
fear, given Speights’ multiple burglary convictions. His offenses had real, harmful
impacts on his victims beyond financial loss.
Third, Speights recruited Quinton Bonds, an ostensible friend, into his PPP
fraud scheme. Speights’ communications with Bonds leave no doubt that he was the
3
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 135
mastermind and used even loved ones for his own personal gain, regardless of what
harm might befall them. As shown in the below excerpts from a WhatsApp
conversation, 2 Bonds expressed reluctance to call the bank to answer questions about
fraudulent loan proceeds deposited into his account, but Speights urged that he
needed to call the bank “asap” to convince them the fraud proceeds were legitimate.
Bonds was nervous that he wouldn’t know the answers to the bank’s questions, and
Speights encouraged him every step of the way – telling Bonds what to expect and
even offering to play his “accountant” and join the call if necessary.
Date Time Sender Recipient Message
4:21 I don’t have to call back or even speak
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights to her if I don't feel like it right?
4:25
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds Open it
4:25
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds She may ask about the money
4:26 She may ask if you were expecting the
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds $
4:26
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds Just call
Remember the amount of the deposit
4:27 and your company name is
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds SANTOLUBES manufacturing llc
4:30 They did that to me and they want to
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds make sure you were expecting the $
...
Tell her you had tried to open a
business at the oceans first but was
unsuccessful because of covid and let
4:42 her know that you have been very
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds busy.
...
4:55
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights Ima call
2 The complete WhatsApp conversation is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
4
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 136
4:55
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds You have to call
4:55 And I'm just the signer for the account
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights for santolubes again shall she ask?
4:55
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds You have to say u own it
4:55
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights The business owner?
4:56
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds Yes
4:56 Okay what else should I be prepared
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights to speak to?
4:56 I don’t have the documents in front of
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights me
4:56 Should I call when I get off when I
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights have the papers?
4:56
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds Call asap
4:57 You HAVE to always call the bank
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds back
...
And again I don't even know when the
company was formed or anything
about it so I'm not feeling prepared to
answer a side cle [sic] damn question
they may have for me on top of I'm at
4:59 work alone with clients right now I'm
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights not prepared to call
5:03
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds Ok
What are they gonna ask and what
am I needing to know shall they ask
because if I call now and they have
5:03 questions it's going to be even more
4/5/2021 p.m. Bonds Speights suspicious when I don't know
...
If needbe call on 3way with me. Tell
5:07 them you have your accountant on the
4/5/2021 p.m. Speights Bonds phone with you
The Court presided over Bonds’ sentencing, during which Bonds recounted the
life-altering night he spent in prison after his arrest for his role in this fraud scheme.
5
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 137
See United States v. Bonds, 23-CR-85, Minute Entry Dec. 16, 2024 (Sentencing). The
ramifications of Speights recruiting Bonds were devastating for him. To be sure,
Bonds agreed to participate in this fraud scheme of his own free will, stood to benefit
from it, and rightly bore responsibility for his own choices. But Speights’ willingness
to recruit a friend into a fraud scheme shows the callousness with which he operated.
Everyone, even supposed loved ones, was a tool for Speights’ enrichment.
And all of this harm that Speights caused – to the government and financial
institutions, to victims both financially and mentally, and to his own friend – was for
his own gain. Between his bank fraud, COVID-19 relief fraud, and the additional
mail thefts he committed after absconding from pretrial supervision, Speights
amassed approximately $949,010. He spent it, in his own words, “just lighting it up”
at “the casino” and spending it on “materialistic stuff” like “over $100,000” in “furs”
and “another half a million” on “jewelry.” Ex. 1 at 57-58. 3 Law enforcement seized
over 40 pieces of jewelry from Speights’ home with a total appraised value of
approximately $477,705.00. Ex. 3 (Appraisals for Administrative Forfeiture). That
jewelry includes an 18-karat gold, diamond, and sapphire ring valued at $75,000; a
2.75-karat loose diamond valued at $50,000; and a 1- karat gold bracelet valued at
$102,900. Id. Law enforcement also seized 11 fur coats, shawls, and hats with a total
appraised value of approximately $56,250. Id. In addition to those items, $62,232 in
cash was seized from Speights’ home. Speights’ greed at the expense of everyone
around him is serious and warrants a significant sentence.
3 Speights asserted that some of the furs and jewelry were given to him, but also
admitted they weren’t purchased with “legit money.” Ex. 1 at 59-60. They have been
administratively forfeited by the United States Postal Inspection Service.
6
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 138
II. Speights’ History and Characteristics
The bank fraud (tied to mail theft) and wire fraud and money laundering (tied
to COVID-19 relief fraud) to which Speights pled guilty are by no means his first
forays into crime. From the age of 20, Speights has engaged in a near-relentless
stream of fraud, deception, and theft. The details of those offenses reveal that
Speights has long been motivated by a pursuit of luxury and a total disregard for his
impact on others. Take, for example, his 2003 conviction for receiving stolen property.
PSR ¶ 74. Speights sustained that conviction after stealing a Lexus and attempting
to steal a Jaguar. Id. ¶ 75. Two years later, Speights pled guilty to access device
fraud after using a stolen access device to purchase a Louis Vuitton handbag, a men’s
diamond ring, a Cuban link gold bracelet, leather goods, and Gucci shoes. Id. ¶ 88.
And he was convicted five times from 2009 – 2019 related to theft of credit cards and
checks. PSR ¶¶ 91 (2009 conviction for identity theft), 96 (2012 conviction for illegal
possession of credit cards), 100 (2014 conviction for credit card crime), 102 (2015
conviction for credit card crime), 107 (2019 conviction for stealing and depositing
checks).
Nor were the instant offenses the last of Speights’ crimes. As the Court knows,
Speights absconded from pretrial supervision for eight months. PSR ¶ 17. He was
found in possession of numerous social security cards, identification cards, checks,
and bank cards in other people’s names. Id. ¶ 18. The face value of the checks in his
apartment at the time of his arrest was $53,760.99. Id. ¶ 30.
7
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 139
Speights’ behavior for his entire adult life leaves no doubt that he is committed
to defrauding others for his own personal gain. His greed is seemingly insatiable, he
is unwilling to work a legitimate job to fund the lifestyle he desires, and he has no
regard for the people he hurts along the way. A significant sentence is necessary to
reflect his history and characteristics.
III. The Need to Promote General and Specific Deterrence
The most significant sentences Speights has faced so far are an aggregate three
years in prison for multiple offenses in 2003 (PSR ¶¶ 72-79), another aggregate,
three-year sentence in 2009 (PSR ¶ 93), and a sentence to a range between 12 and 48
months for a probation violation in 2016 (PSR ¶ 90). After each sentence, Speights
returns to theft and fraud. Those lesser sentences have clearly been insufficient to
deter him.
Nor is the prospect of a federal felony conviction sufficient to deter Speights.
He made that clear when he fled from pretrial supervision to continue his fraud
schemes. He is undeterred by the imprimatur of the District Court or the seriousness
8
Case 1:23-cr-00078-RGA Document 51 Filed 09/11/25 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 140
of the charges. His conviction alone will not deter him – a significant prison term is
necessary to impress upon him that his way of life up to this moment cannot continue.
More generally, financial crimes like Speights’ present a seductive opportunity
to get rich with little perceived risk. It is all too easy for a fraudster to convince
himself he will face no repercussions for his crimes. As such, it is all the more
important to demonstrate that the repercussions are real. A sentence within the
Guidelines range will reenforce to Speights and to the public that financial crimes
are not worth the risk, and will have a meaningful general and specific deterrent
impact.
IV. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the government requests a sentence of 87 months of
incarceration, at the top of the Sentencing Guidelines range. Such a sentence is
sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to achieve the goals of sentencing set forth
in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
Respectfully submitted,
JULIANNE E. MURRAY
United States Attorney
By: /s/ Carly A. Hudson
Carly A. Hudson
Assistant United States Attorney
Dated: September 11, 2025
9
File and source
- File
- 51-sentencing-memorandum-by-usa-as-to-crandall-speights.pdf
- Size
- 309,333 bytes
- SHA-256
- a48d23cc1f50d8d3abfc76c88701e2ccea108e2fecd7f049ea1bf31b4b7c157e
- Original
- PACER (login required)