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

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 05-25-2022

Case Style:

United States of America v. Chanell Easton

Case Number: 2:22-cr-00103-JAM

Judge: 2:22-cr-00103-JAM-1

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (Sacramento County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:



Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan

Click Here For The Best Sacramento Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory


Description: Sacramento, California criminal defense lawyer represented defendant charged with wire fraud and aggravated identity theft.

From June 2013 to February 2018, Chanell Easton, age 36, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, worked as an administrator at a church in Yuba City. During her employment, Easton stole over $360,000 from the church, including from its food pantry and youth ministry, during a years-long embezzlement scheme. Without the church’s knowledge or authorization, Easton opened five business credit card accounts in the church’s name. Easton used these five credit cards, as well as a credit card used by the church’s youth pastor, to make personal purchases—including at a hair salon, retail stores, online retailers, a vacation rental service, and to buy concert tickets—and then paid off the resulting balance with the church’s money. Easton also transferred money directly from the church’s bank accounts to her own personal account, paid down the balance of her own personal credit card, and paid her cellphone provider for her personal bills and for new phones.

According to the indictment, Easton also stole money from the church by writing checks to others for personal expenses and by writing checks to herself, on which she forged the signatures of the church’s treasurer or the head volunteer of the church’s food pantry.

This case is the product of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Elliot C. Wong and Christopher S. Hales are prosecuting the case.

WIRE FRAUD
(1-22)
AGGRAVATED IDENTITY THEFT
(23-24)

Outcome: Indictment for a commission of a crime is not proof of guilt.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: