UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No. -----------

18 u.s.c. § 1349 

18 u.s.c. § 1343 

18.U.S.C. § 982 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

vs. 

DANIEL HERNANDEZ, 

Defendant. 

I -------------

INFORMATION 

The United States Attorney charges that: 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 

At all times relevant to this Information: 

The Small Business Administration 

1. The United States Small Business Administration ("SBA") was an executive 

branch agency of the United States government that provided support to entrepreneurs and small 

businesses. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and strengthen the nation's economy by 

enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses and by assisting in the economic 

recovery of communities after disasters. 

2. As part ofthis effort, the SBA enabled and provided for loans through banks, credit 

unions, and other lenders. These loans had government-backed guarantees. 

22-20529-CR-MOORE/LOUIS

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 1 of 10
The Paycheck Protection Program 

3. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ("CARES") Act was a federal 

law enacted in or around March 2020 and designed to provide emergency financial assistance to 

the millions of Americans who were suffering from the economic effects caused by the COVID19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of forgivable 

loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred 

to as the Paycheck Protection Program ("PPP"). 

4. In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business submitted a PPP loan 

application, which was signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan 

application required the business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the 

program rules and make certain affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP 

loan. In the PPP loan application (SBA Form 2483), the small business (through its authorized 

representative) was required to provide, among other things, its: (a) average monthly payroll 

expenses; and (b) number of employees. These figures were used to calculate the amount of money 

the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP. In addition, businesses applying for a 

PPP loan were required to provide documentation confirming their payroll expenses. 

5. A PPP loan application was processed by a participating lender. If a PPP loan 

application was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP loan using its own monies. 

While it was the participating lender that issued the PPP loan, the loan was 100% guaranteed by 

the SBA. Data from the application, including information about the borrower, the total amount 

of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the 

course of processing the loan. 

2 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 2 of 10
6. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible 

expenses-payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP allowed the interest 

and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on 

these expense items within a designated period of time and used a defined portion of the PPP loan 

proceeds on payroll expenses. 

The Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program 

7. Another related response to the COVID-19 outbreak was an expansion of an 

existing disaster-related program - the Economic Injury Disaster Loan ("EIDL") - to provide for 

loan assistance (including $10,000 advances) for small businesses and other eligible entities for 

loans up to $2 million. The EIDL proceeds could have been used to pay fixed debts, payroll, 

accounts payable, and other bills that could have been paid had the disaster not occurred; however, 

such loan proceeds were not intended to replace lost sales or profits, or for the expansion of a 

business. 

8. Unlike certain other types of SBA-guaranteed loans, EIDL funds were issued 

directly from the United States Treasury, and applicants applied for EIDL funds directly through 

the SBA via an online portal and application. The EIDL application process, which also used 

certain outside contractors for system support, collected information concerning the business and 

the business owner, including: information about the gross revenues for the business prior to 

January 31, 2020; and the cost of goods sold. Applicants electronically certified that the 

information provided was true and accurate and were warned that any false statement or 

misrepresentations to the SBA, or any misapplication of loan proceeds may result in sanctions, 

including criminal penalties. 

3 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 3 of 10
9. EIDL applications were received in and processed using computer servers located 

in the states of Iowa, Virginia, and Washington. EIDL disbursement payments were initiated by 

the SBA using computer servers located in the state of Colorado, which transmitted the payment 

information to the Treasury using computer servers located in the state of Virginia. 

The Defendant and Related Individuals 

10. Defendant DANIEL HERNANDEZ was a resident of Miami-Dade County, 

Florida, and an employee of Bank 1. 

11. Prior to working at Bank 1, DANIEL HERNANDEZ worked at Bank 2. 

12. Armando Ariel De Leon was a resident of Miami-Dade County, Florida, and a coconspirator of the defendant. Until approximately January 2021 , Armando Ariel De Leon was an 

employee of Bank 1. 

13. Erich Javier Alfonso Barata was a resident of Miami-Dade County, Florida, and a 

co-conspirator of the defendant. Erich Javier Alfonso Barata was a customer of Bank 1 and the 

President of Black Hookah Inc., a Miami, Florida-based entity. 

Relevant Banks 

14. Bank 1 was a national bank based in New Jersey. 

15. Bank 2 was a national bank based in North Carolina. 

16. Both Bank 1 and Bank 2 were approved SBA lenders of PPP loans and insured by 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"). 

COUNT 1 

Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud 

(18 u.s.c. § 1349) 

1. The General Allegations section of this Information is re-alleged and incorporated 

by reference as though fully set forth herein. 

4 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 4 of 10
2. From in or around April 2020, continuing through at least in or around July 2021 , 

in Miami-Dade County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant, 

DANIEL HERNANDEZ, 

did willfully, that is, with the intent to further the object of the conspiracy, and knowingly combine, 

conspire, confederate, and agree with Armando Ariel De Leon, Erich Javier Alfonso Barata, and 

others to knowingly, and with the intent to defraud, devise, and intend to devise, a scheme and 

artifice to defraud, and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent 

pretenses, representations, and promises, knowing that the pretenses, representations, and 

promises were false and fraudulent when made, and, for the purpose of executing the scheme and 

artifice, did knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted, by means of wire communications in 

interstate and foreign commerce, certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds, in violation 

ofTitle 18, United States Code, Section 1343. 

PURPOSE OF THE CONSPIRACY 

3. It was the purpose of the conspiracy for the defendant and his co-conspirators to 

unjustly enrich themselves by, among other things: (a) submitting and causing the submission of 

false and fraudulent applications for loans and grants made available through the SBA to provide 

relief for the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, namely, PPP and EIDL loans; 

(b) offering, paying, and receiving kickbacks in return for referring other individuals for the 

submission of false and fraudulent loan applications; and ( c) diverting fraud proceeds for the 

defendant's and co-conspirators' personal use, the use and benefit of others, and to further the 

conspiracy. 

MANNER AND MEANS OF THE CONSPIRACY 

The manner and means by which the defendant and his co-conspirators sought to 

accomplish the object and purpose of the conspiracy included, among others, the following: 

5 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 5 of 10
4. In or around April 2020, DANIEL HERNANDEZ agreed with Erich Javier 

Alfonso Barata to prepare and submit false and fraudulent PPP loan applications. 

5. Between in or around April 2020, and in or around July 2021, DANIEL 

HERNANDEZ directed his co-conspirators to submit the PPP loan applications through interstate 

wire communications at Bank 1 or Bank 2. 

6. Between in or around April 2020, and in or around July 2021, DANIEL 

HERNANDEZ, Erich Javier Alfonso Barata, and other co-conspirators submitted and caused the 

submission of false and fraudulent PPP applications at Bank I and Bank 2, including a false and 

fraudulent PPP loan application on behalf of Black Hookah Inc. at Bank I. The applications, 

among other things, falsely and fraudulently represented each company's number of employees 

and amount of monthly payroll. 

7. Between in or around April 2020, and m or around July 2021 , DANIEL 

HERNANDEZ and his co-conspirators submitted and caused the submission of false and 

fraudulent information and documentation in support of the PPP loan applications, including 

falsified Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") forms and falsified bank statements, 

8. In or around January 2021, Armando Ariel De Leon joined the conspiracy. In 

furtherance of the conspiracy, Armando Ariel De Leon submitted and caused the submission of 

false and fraudulent EIDL applications on behalf of Florida-based entities that co-conspirators 

controlled. Armando Ariel De Leon agreed with DANIEL HERNANDEZ to share in a 

percentage of any resulting loans proceeds. 

9. As a result of the false and fraudulent PPP loan applications submitted as part of 

this scheme, Bank 1 and Bank 2 approved PPP loans to entities belonging to the defendant's 

6 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 6 of 10
conspirators and disbursed, via interstate wire transmission, over $15,000,000 in loan proceeds 

into bank accounts controlled by the defendant's co-conspirators. 

10. As a result of the false and fraudulent EID L loan applications submitted as part of 

this scheme, the SBA approved EIDL loans to entities belonging to the defendant's co-conspirators 

and disbursed EIDL loan proceeds to bank accounts controlled by the defendant's co-conspirators, 

via interstate wire transmission. 

11. Co-conspirators paid DANIEL HERNANDEZ, Armando Ariel De Leon, Erich 

Javier Alfonso Barata, and others a kickback based on each false and fraudulent loan funded. 

12. The defendant and his co-conspirators used the proceeds from the fraudulent 

scheme to enrich themselves and others, and to further the conspiracy. 

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349. 

FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS 

1. The allegations contained in this Information are hereby re-alleged and by this 

reference fully incorporated herein for the purpose of alleging forfeiture to the United States of 

certain property in which the defendant, DANIEL HERNANDEZ, has an interest. 

2. Upon conviction of a violation of a criminal conspiracy to violate Title 18, United 

Sates Code, Sections 1349 and 1343, as alleged in this Information, the defendant shall forfeit to 

the United States any property constituting, or derived from, proceeds the person obtained directly 

or indirectly, as the result of such offense, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 

982(a)(2)(B). 

7 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 7 of 10
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(l), and the procedures set forth 

at Title 21 , United States Code, Section 853, as incorporated by Title 18, United States Code, 

Section 982(b)(l). 

!STANT 

8 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 8 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CASE 0.: 

v. 

DANIEL HERNANDEZ, CERTIFICATE OF TRIAL ATTORNEY* 

I -------------- Superseding Case Information: 

Defendant. 

Court Division (select one) 

El Miami O Key West FTP 

FTL O WPB 

New Defendant(s) (Yes or No) 

Number of New Defendants 

Total number of New Counts 

I do hereby certify that: 

I. I have carefully considered the all egations of the indictment, the number of defendants, the number of probable 

witnesses and the legal complexities of the Indictment/Information attached hereto. 

2. I am aware that the information supplied on this statement will be relied upon by the Judges of this Court in setting 

their calendars and scheduling criminal trials under the mandate of the Speedy Trial Act, Title 28 U.S.C. §3 161. 

3. Interpreter: (Yes or No) _No__ 

List language and/or dialect: _______ _ 

4. Thjs case will talce_O __ days for the parties to try. 

5. Pl ease check appropriate category and type of offense listed below: 

(Check only one) 

I 0 0 to 5 days 

II O 6 to 10 days 

III D 11 to 20 days 

IV D 21 to 60 days 

V D 61 days and over 

(Check only one) 

□ Petty 

D Minor 

D Misdemeanor 

[Z] Fe lony 

6. Has this case been previously filed in this District Court? (Yes orNo) _Nn_ 

If yes, Judge__________ Case No. ________ _ 

7. Has a complaint been filed in this matter? (Yes or No) Yes 

If yes, Magistrate Case No. 22-3333-MJ-EGT 

8. Does this case relate to a previously filed matter in this District Court? (Yes or o) Yes 

If yes, Judge Martinez Case No. 22-20420-CR-JEM; 22-20194-CR-JEM 

9. Defendant(s) in federal custody as of ---------------- 10. Defendant(s) in state custody as of ----------------- 1 1. Rule 20 from the District of 

12. Is this a potential death penalty case? (Yes or No) No 

13. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Northern Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office 

prior to August 8, 20 14 (Mag. Judge Shaniek Maynard? (Yes or No) _Nn_ 

14. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Central Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office 

prior to October 3, 20 19 (Mag. Judge Jared Strauss? (Yes orNo) _o_ 

By: 

Assistant United States A 

Court ID No. A5502535 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 9 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PENALTY SHEET 

Defendant's ame: _D_AN __ IE_L_H_ERN __ AN_D_E_z ___________ ______ _ 

Case No: ---- ----- ----------------------

Count #: I 

Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1349 

* Max. Term of Imprisonment: 20 years 

* Mandatory Min. Term of Imprisonment (if applicable): N/A 

* Max. Supervised Release: 3 years 

* Max. Fine: $250 000 

*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, supervised release and fines. It does not include 

restitution, special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable. 

Case 1:22-cr-20529-KMM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 10 of 10