UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHELITHA RENEE ROBERTSON

Background Shelitha Robertson and her attorney, Chandra Norton, submitted fraudulent applications for Paycheck Protection Program loans during the COVID-19 pandemic. They claimed their businesses employed hundreds of people when, in reality, most had no employees. They secured nearly fifteen million dollars in funding before banks detected the scheme and froze their accounts. Robertson was convicted of wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and money laundering, and sentenced to eighty-seven months in prison. She appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, evidentiary rulings, and the sentencing and restitution orders. The court’s reasoning The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the record in the light most favorable to the government and found the evidence sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. The court noted that Robertson admitted her companies had no employees and that she signed fraudulent applications. The court also found that the district court properly instructed the jury on deliberate ignorance and did not abuse its discretion in admitting lay testimony from an SBA employee or allowing a co-conspirator to explain recorded conversations. Regarding sentencing, the court held that Robertson was not entitled to credit for repaying funds after the banks detected the fraud. The court affirmed that Robertson was jointly liable for the full loss amount and restitution because the conspiracy was a joint undertaking. What it means going forward The decision reinforces that defendants in PPP fraud cases may be held jointly liable for the total losses caused by their co-conspirators, even if they personally repaid some funds after detection. It also clarifies that lay witnesses with institutional knowledge may testify about program procedures without expert designation.