Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offenses to which the defendant is pleading guilty are as follows:
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offense to which he is pleading guilty are as follows: Beginning about February 2005 and continuing through about May 21, 2007, at Xxx’x Summit and Raymore, in the Western District of Missouri, and elsewhere, defendant Xxxxx conspired with others including co-defendants Xxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, and others including Xxxxx Xxxxxxx, to obtain money from mortgage lenders and title companies, and to retain the money obtained, by means of material false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises, and by the concealment of material facts, and in the execution of the scheme to commit the offenses of interstate transportation of funds obtained by fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2314 and 2, and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.§§ 1343 and 2. The defendant does not dispute that as part of the scheme, the co-conspirators:
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offense to which he is pleading guilty are as follows: During all times relevant, Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxx owned and operated Wolf's Run, a business located in Irving, New York. Wolf's Run was a business that operated a gas station, convenience store and trucking transport business. Neither Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxx nor Xxxx'x Run was a licensed tobacco wholesaler in New York authorized to bring untaxed cigarettes into New York State. New York State imposes excise taxes on all cigarettes sold in the state, unless expressly exempted by law or by private agreement between New York State and an Indian nation or tribe (either approved by the legislature or part of a stipulation and order approved by a federal court). Under New York State law, cigarettes can only be transported into the state by a limited number of state-licensed stamping agents (i.e. wholesalers). The New York Department of Taxation and Finance pre-collects the cigarette excise tax from these state-licensed stamping agents on cigarettes that are sold to retailers, but prior to their delivery to the retailers. This taxing scheme was upheld as specifically applicable against Indian nations on May 9, 2011, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Oneida Nation of New York x. Xxxxx, 645 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2011). Federal and New York State law require that tax stamps be affixed to cigarette packages—prior to their delivery to retailers—reflecting that the required state taxes have been paid. During the relevant time period, New York State imposed a cigarette excise tax of $4.35 per pack or $43.50 per carton. In New York State, only licensed wholesalers may purchase unstamped cigarettes. This is done either directly through the cigarette manufacturer or through other wholesalers. Under New York State law, it is the obligation of state-licensed stamping agents to prepay the excise tax and affix stamps on all cigarette packs. Under New York state and federal law, tobacco wholesalers must report the sales of cigarettes to the state. Codefendant Xxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx would make regular purchases in Kansas City, Missouri, of contraband cigarettes from undercover agents (UCAs) of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in exchange for U.S. Currency. Xxxxxxxx, X. Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxxxx and Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx would coordinate the cigarette orders and wire transfers from the vendors in New York State – including Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxx, X...
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offenses to which he is pleading guilty are as follows: Defendant admits that between July 1, 2009, and June 19, 2010, he conspired with Xxxxx Xxxxxxx and others to distribute cocaine and cocaine base in the Western District of Missouri in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 846, 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). In July 2009, KCPD’s Gang Squad and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) began investigating the cocaine trafficking activities of Xxxxxxx. In October 2009, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) joined the investigation. Xxxxxxx sold ounce quantities of cocaine base to a confidential informant on October 27, November 11, and December 3 of 2009. Through the interception of court-authorized wire and electronic communications of target telephones used by Xxxxxxx, investigators learned that Xxxxxxx purchased kilogram quantities of cocaine from Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, who was supplied by Xxxxxxx Xxxx. This cocaine was then distributed to Xxxxxxx’x associates, including the defendant, as cocaine or cocaine base. Xxxxxxx and his associates would distribute cocaine base from various houses located in Kansas City neighborhoods. The location sites for distribution were changed frequently in order to defeat law enforcement attempts at surveillance and search warrants. Investigators learned that almost immediately after acquiring cocaine from Xxxxxxx, usually in the amount of one or two kilograms, Xxxxxxx and his associates would begin calling and receiving calls from hundreds of potential customers for cocaine base. Investigators estimate that during the course of the wiretap investigation, which began on February 3, 2010, Xxxxxxx’x organization was responsible for acquiring and distributing 35 - 40 kilograms of cocaine. The following paragraphs are representative of the intercepted telephone calls related to the defendant that occurred over the course of the conspiracy: On February 8, 2010, a call was intercepted between Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxx discussing a transaction for an ounce of cocaine base. During the call, Xxxxxx asked Xxxxxxx, “What’s good?” Xxxxxxx responded, “I’m at the house. I’m putting shit together. I’m about to come out though. What you want...just one?” Xxxxxx replied, “Yup. The whole. Yeah.” On March 25, 2010, an incoming telephone call was intercepted on Xxxxxxx’x cellular telephone between Xxxxxxx and the defenda...
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offenses to which the defendant is pleading guilty are as follows: In June of 2010, the Xxxxxxxx County Drug Strike Force (BCDSF) began an investigation into the methamphetamine distribution activities of Xxxxx X. Xxxxxx, Xx. Xxxxxx was starting to be identified in various interviews as a regular and prolific methamphetamine source for the St. Xxxxxx area. Before BCDSF could start a proactive investigation, Xxxxxx wrecked a motorcycle (later found to have been taken that day for payment on a drug debt), which caught on fire on impact, and he was hospitalized for a period of time. Evidence obtained through a number of arrests, searches, controlled buys, recorded calls, interviews, and other investigative work, resulted in this nine defendant historical methamphetamine and heroin distribution conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy and firearm possession indictment.
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the conduct underlying the offense to which defendant is pleading guilty include the following: On April 14, 2011, JCDTF Detective Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, acting in an undercover role, ansd wearing a transmitting device, met with a confidential informant (CI) who introduced Doogs to APete@ (later identified as Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx) at a McDonalds on E. 87th Street in Kansas City, Missouri. Xxxxxxxx made statements during this meeting that he had a friend who had just Xxxxx a burn@ (cooked meth), and that he had several Aclients@ purchasing meth both in and outside Kansas City. Doogs purchased a small bag of methamphetamine from Xxxxxxxx for $500. Xxxxx asked Xxxxxxxx if he could supply ounces of meth. Xxxxxxxx said he could, agreed to sell meth to Doogs in the future, and said that the price would go down as the amounts went up. The meth purchased on this occasion weighed about 6.4 grams, and field-tested poitive for methamphetamine. Other JCDTF officers monitored the transaction by listening to the broadcasts from the transmitter worn by Doogs. The transmissions were also recorded. On April 21, 2011, Detective Xxxxx, again working in an undercover capacity and wearing a transmitter, met Xxxxxxxx at a Lowes home improvement store on Sterling in Kansas City, Missouri. Doogs saw that Xxxxxxxx was standing next to a white Ford F-150, extended cab pickup, and that a dark-skinned male wearing round-rim glasses (later identified as Xxxx Xxxxxx) was sitting in the driver=s seat. The driver told Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxx to go to a nearby McDonalds to do the deal. Xxxxxxxx then got into Doogs= undercover vehicle and they drove to the McDonalds a short distance east of the Lowes location. Xxxxxxxx gave Xxxxx a clear plastic bag containing methamphetamine, and Doogs paid Xxxxxxxx $800. Xxxxxxxx told Xxxxx he had another 1/4 ounce of meth for sale at his residence. Xxxxx declined to purchase the extra meth, but agreed to buy more than one-half ounce the next time. Xxxxx then drove Xxxxxxxx back to the Ford pickup. The drugs purchased on this occasion weighed about 14.6 grams, and field tested positive for methamphetamine. The transmissions from the transmitter were monitored and recorded. On May 5, 2011, Detective Xxxxx, again wearing a transmitter, met Xxxxxxxx at the Pick-n-Pull on X. Xxxxxx Road in Kansas City, Missouri. Xxxxxxxx arrived in a white Ford cargo van, riding in the passenger seat. Doogs paid Xxxxxxxx $800 for a small bag of ...
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offenses to which the defendant is pleading guilty are as follows: In early 2008, the DEA and KCMOPD began an investigation into a loosely affiliated crack distribution ring operating in Kansas City, Missouri. That investigation eventually lead to a number of arrests and indictments and resulted in several cooperators. In the Spring and Summer of 2009, one of those cooperators began buying crack and powder cocaine from their Hispanic sources within the Western District of Missouri. Eventually, the cooperator worked up to buying direct from defendant XXXX XXXXXX, a/k/a CASPER. Over the course of several months sufficient probable cause was obtained to initiate Title III wire interceptions on XXXXXX’x phone in November 2009, and May and June of 2010. This indictment is a result of that investigation. XXXXXX was determined to be the main supplier for most of the indictees herein and XXXXXX had one main source, co-defendant XXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX, and a few smaller, as needed, suppliers. While XXXXXX was mainly an ounce cocaine (crack and powder) supplier and pound marijuana supplier, he would try to accommodate whatever anyone wanted, with varying results.
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offenses to which he is pleading guilty are as follows: That between on or about January 1, 2002, and May 31, 2007, in the Western District of Missouri and elsewhere, XXXXXX X. XXXX, defendant herein, did knowingly and intentionally combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with others, both known and unknown, to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, a Schedule II controlled substance, in an amount of 50 grams or more, contrary to the provisions of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(B); all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 846. Defendant was a member of the Galloping Goose Motorcycle Club chartered in Kansas City, Missouri. The Galloping Goose have an affiliate organization known as the El Forastero Motorcycle Club and in fact, the clubs share a common clubhouse in Kansas City, Missouri. As a member of the Galloping Goose, he was required to annually pay dues and attend a certain number of motorcycle trips, known as “runs” per year. For each run, whether or not the member went on a particular run, the members were required to pay run money that was pooled, or collected by each club charter, forwarded to the specific Galloping Goose or El Forastero charter that hosted the particular motorcycle run, and was used to purchase methamphetamine and marijuana. Those drugs were maintained in run bags and were distributed, or made available, to all the club members that attended the run. As the treasurer of the Galloping Goose, the defendant knew what the money was going to be used for and knowingly contributed run money and in so doing, the defendant admits that he distributed methamphetamine and marijuana and assisted others in the distribution of those drugs. As an active member of the Galloping Goose Motorcycle Club, defendant participated in the distribution of between 500 -1500 grams of methamphetamine, figuring at least 20 runs attended (out of a total of 35 runs possible) over 5 years, each involving the distribution of 1 ounce (28 grams) of methamphetamine or more per run.
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offense to which defendant is pleading guilty are as follows: From in or about 2014 through January 2017, the defendant knowingly and intentionally participated in the racketeering conspiracy charged in Count One of the Superseding Indictment. In joining the conspiracy, the defendant understood that a racketeering enterprise existed, as described in paragraphs 1 through 8 of the Superseding Indictment, and that the activities of the enterprise affected interstate commerce. The defendant also understood that two or more people had reached a conspiratorial agreement to conduct or participate in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise, directly or indirectly, through a pattern of racketeering activity, as described in paragraph 8 of the Superseding Indictment. The defendant associated himself with the enterprise and joined the conspiracy by knowingly and intentionally agreeing with another member of the conspiracy that the defendant and/or another conspirator would commit at least two acts of racketeering of the type or types alleged in paragraph 8 of the Superseding Indictment. To this end, the defendant agreed to commit and did commit the following types of racketeering activity: First, from 2014 through January 2017, the defendant participated in a conspiracy to violate the federal narcotics laws. In furtherance of this illegal narcotics conspiracy, the defendant distributed to customers in St. Xxxxxx, Missouri quantities of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine. The defendant acquired most of the illegal narcotics he distributed from sources in Kansas City, Kansas. It was foreseeable to the defendant that members of the conspiracy distributed more than 5 kilograms of heroin, more than 5 kilograms of cocaine, and more than 5 kilograms of methamphetamine. Second, on or about September 27, 2014, in St. Xxxxxx, Missouri, the defendant attempted to kill or cause serious physical injury to the person identified in the Superseding Indictment as Rival #2, in violation of Section 565.050 of the Missouri Revised Statutes. The defendant did so by firing gunshots at Rival #2 in response to an accusation that the defendant had provided fake cocaine to Rival #2. The defendant agrees that the Government can prove that one of the gunshots hit Rival #2 in the foot, causing Rival #2 to be hospitalized.
Factual Basis for Guilty Plea. The parties agree that the facts constituting the offense to which he is pleading guilty are as follows: From 2005 through the February of 2008, the defendants, Xxxxx and Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx owned and operated Ozark National Mortgage (ONM). While operating this mortgage brokerage house, XXX worked and was sharing office space with Xxxxxxxxx I.P Holdings, L.L.C (Xxxxxxxxx) in Xxxxxx County, within the Western District of Missouri. During this period of time, Xxxxxxxxx would sponsor real estate investment seminars. These seminars were designed to recruit potential investors to apply for mortgage loans for the construction and sale of residential homes in the southwest region of Missouri and northwest region of Arkansas. The sales pitch that was made to potential investors by Xxxxxxxxx that included that that they would not have to put any of their money down and after two to three years, they would receive $10,000 per investment. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx was personally aware of these representations as they were present at several of these sales seminars and introduced several individuals to Xxxxxxxxx as prospective investors. ONM, through Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx, would review the personal and financial information of each investor to determine whether each individual had sufficient assets and a credit score that would result in the approval of a loan with a lending institution. Once it was determined that the investor was eligible to obtain a loan, ONM would then create the necessary mortgage loan documentation to submit to a prospective lending institution for potential funding. In each of these mortgage loan applications and specifically on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement, it was stated that the borrower, who is also the investor, was providing their cash as part of the closing transaction to obtain the loan from the lending institution. A HUD-1 Settlement Statement is a document that was created and utilized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, a federal agency, to ensure the full and accurate disclosure of all information related to each individual real estate transaction submitted for consideration by lending institutions. Prior to the closing of each mortgage loan, Xxxxxxxxx would transfer monies to an escrow account and a cashier’s check from such escrow account would be drawn in the name of the borrower. The cashier’s check drawn from the escrow account was in the exact dollar amount that the borrower owed at the time of the closing...
