Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 12-20-2021

Case Style:

United States of America v. Jeremie Saintvil

Case Number:

Judge:

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida (Alachua County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:


Best Gainesville Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory


Description: Gainesville, Florida criminal defense attorney represented defendant charged with bank fraud, making false statements and aggravated identity theft.

Jeremie Saintvil, 46, of Delray Beach, Florida. Saintvil was indicted for bank fraud and making false statements on loan and credit applications generally.

“The theft of vital taxpayer relief funds and victimization of our elderly is reprehensible,” stated Acting U.S. Attorney Coody. “The deceptive and sophisticated acts of this defendant not only diverted emergency financial assistance from small businesses necessary for job retention, but also victimized our elderly citizens, many of whom due to advanced age or illness, were more vulnerable and unable to readily discern their identities had been stolen and used for illegal acts. With the assistance of our dedicated law enforcement partners, we are committed to investigating and prosecuting those who engage in acts of elder abuse and covid-related fraud.”

Between February 2018 and June 2020, Saintvil submitted fraudulent applications seeking more than $1.5 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster (EIDL) loans offered by the SBA. As part of his scheme, Saintvil fraudulently obtained the identities of elderly individuals who were residents of senior living facilities, whom he then represented were principles in the fictitious businesses seeking the forgivable loans. The fraudulent applications, which were directed to nine different federally insured credit unions, banks, and the SBA, misrepresented the number of employees and payroll expenses of the alleged companies, and made numerous other inaccurate statements in support of the PPP and EIDL loan applications, including submitting falsified tax documents and bank account information.

“Today’s sentencing is the final chapter in this investigation and can hopefully begin the healing process for all of those impacted by the defendant’s nefarious actions,” said IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agent in Charge Brian Payne. “We will continue to investigate criminals like Saintvil who steal identities, rob vital taxpayer relief funds, and victimize the elderly.”

The Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act is a federal law enacted March 29, 2020. It is designed to provide emergency financial assistance to millions of Americans who are suffering the economic effects resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act is the authorization of forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses through the PPP. The Small Business Administration (SBA) guarantees PPP loans which are funded by participating financial institutions. The PPP allows qualifying small businesses and other organizations to receive loans with a maturity of two years and an interest rate of one percent. Businesses must use PPP loan proceeds for payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent and utilities. The PPP then allows the interest and principal to be forgiven if businesses spent the loan proceeds on qualifying expenses within a set time-period and used at least a certain percentage of the loan proceeds for payroll expenses.

“In a time of national turmoil and uncertainty, this defendant flagrantly defrauded programs intended to assist Americans and their businesses,” said Sean T. Ryan, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Jacksonville Division. “His total disregard for his fellow citizens during the pandemic – especially vulnerable elders – revealed his true colors as a fraudster. The FBI will continue to allocate resources to investigate COVID-19 and elder fraud, and work alongside our partners to hold accountable those who use illegal means and criminal behavior to take advantage of others.”

“Lying to gain access to SBA’s pandemic response programs is not without consequence,” said SBA OIG’s Eastern Region Special Agent in Charge Amaleka McCall-Brathwaite. “Our office will aggressively pursue evidence of wrongdoing and bring those responsible to justice. I want to thank the U.S. Attorney’s Office and our law enforcement partners for their dedication and pursuit of justice.”

This conviction was the result of a joint investigation by Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigations, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the SBA-Office of Inspector General. Assistant United States Attorneys Justin M. Keen and David Byron prosecuted the case.

BANK FRAUD
(1)

LOAN AND CREDIT APPLICATIONS GENERALLY
(2)

FRAUD WITH IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS
(3)

STATEMENTS OR ENTRIES GENERALLY
(4)

Outcome: BANK FRAUD
(1) 180 months imprisonment; 5 years of supervised release; $100 SMA; $1,560,628.38 restitution; defendant previously denied bond and remanded to the custody of the USM
LOAN AND CREDIT APPLICATIONS GENERALLY
(2) 180 months imprisonment, to run concurrently with terms imposed on Counts 1 and 4; 5 years of supervised release to run concurrently with terms imposed on Counts 1, 3 and 4; $100 SMA; $1,560,628.38 restitution; defendant previously denied bond and remanded to the custody of the USM
FRAUD WITH IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS
(3) 24 months imprisonment, to run consecutively to terms imposed on Counts 1, 2 and 4; 1 year of supervised release to run concurrently with terms imposed on Counts 1, 2 and 4; $100 SMA; $1,560,628.38 restitution; defendant previously denied bond and remanded to the custody of the USM
STATEMENTS OR ENTRIES GENERALLY
(4) 60 months imprisonment, to run concurrently with terms imposed on Counts 1 and 2; 3 years of supervised release to run concurrently with terms imposed on Counts 1, 2 and 3; $100 SMA; $1,560,628.38 restitution; defendant previously denied bond and remanded to the custody of the USM

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: