White Collar Criminal Defense

The White Collar Criminal Defense Practice Group at Schoeppl Law, P.A. is led by Carl F. Schoeppl, a former senior federal prosecutor with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Division of Enforcement, and prosecuted some of the most notable  securities fraud cases on behalf of the SEC in federal courts throughout the Southeastern United States at that time, including  SEC v. Chapnick,  [1993-1994 Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 98,076 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 11, 1994)(an insider trading and $33 million securities fraud case involving former officers of the failed Commonwealth Savings and Loan Association of Florida); and  SEC v. Bradt, [Current Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 98,624 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 1995)(a $27 million “Ponzi” scheme case involving the notorious con-man Thomas R. Mullens and the defunct Omni Capital Group, Ltd.).  In connection with the SEC’s case against Mullens, Mr. Schoeppl received the FBI’s Service in the Public Interest Award for assistance he provided in the successful parallel criminal prosecution of Mullens by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida.  Mr. Schoeppl was the SEC’s representative on the Organized Crime Task Force in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida and participated in advising on securities-related matters with the FBI, IRS, the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Postal Inspector, and other federal agencies in major organized crime investigations conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida.   Prior to his tenure at the SEC, Mr. Schoeppl was a Special Assistant District Attorney in Atlanta, Georgia with responsibility over trying major felony criminal cases.   Mr. Schoeppl has  been appointed by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, upon the recommendation of the SEC,  as the Receiver for five different corporations in an SEC enforcement action styled SEC v. Schaefer, et al., Case No. 98-343-CIV-ORL-22A (M.D. Fla.)($3.5 million securities fraud/Ponzi scheme case involving the sale of promissory notes). Mr. Schoeppl has also been appointed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, upon the recommendation of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), as the Receiver for Transworld Enterprises, Inc. in an FTC enforcement action styled FTC v. Transworld Enterprises, Inc., et al., Case No. 00-8126-CIV-GRAHAM (S.D. Fla.)($3 million nationwide franchise fraud case involving the sale of ATM business opportunities).  Mr. Schoeppl was appointed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, upon the recommendation of the SEC, to serve as the Receiver for U.S. Capital Funding, Inc. in a $48 million securities fraud case styled SEC v. First Capital Services, Inc., et al., Case No. 00-8445-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS (S.D. Fla.).  Mr. Schoeppl was appointed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, upon the recommendation of the FTC, as Temporary Receiver for America’s Shopping Network, Inc. (“ASN”), Consumer Services, Inc., Karen Zagami, Carianne Sica, Louis Gangi, HME, Inc., and John Epstein in an FTC enforcement action styled FTC v. America’s Shopping Network, Inc., et al., Case No. 02-80540-CIV-HURLEY (S.D. Fla.).  In ASN, the Defendants allegedly conducted a nationwide fraudulent work-at-home scheme. Mr. Schoeppl has also served as an expert witness for the SEC in SEC v. Web Hosting Headquarters Partnership, et al., Case No.: 00-4975-CIV-HIGHSMITH/GARBER (S.D. Fla.).  Mr. Schoeppl was appointed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, upon the recommendation of the FTC, as the Receiver for Fidelity ATM, Inc. (“Fidelity ATM”) and Steinberg Group, Inc. (“Steinberg Group”) in an FTC enforcement action styled FTC v. Fidelity ATM, Inc., et al., Case No. 06-81101-CIV-HURLEY-HOPKINS (S.D. Fla.).  In Fidelity ATM, the FTC alleged that Fidelity ATM fraudulently sold automated teller machines (“ATM’s”) to more than 100 consumers across the United States.  The FTC also alleged that Fidelity ATM failed to make disclosures required by the Franchise Rule and made unsubstantiated earnings claims.  In total, the victims were allegedly defrauded of approximately $4.2 million in connection with the scheme.  In his capacity as the Receiver for Fidelity ATM and the Steinberg Group, Mr. Schoeppl assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida in the parallel criminal investigation and prosecution of Andrew Steinberg, the President of Fidelity ATM and the Steinberg Group, and Stephen Duffie, the of Fidelity ATM.  A federal grand jury indicted Steinberg and Duffie in a 16-count indictment for conspiracy, mail fraud, and wire fraud for allegedly conspiring to sell fraudulent automated teller machine (“ATM”) business opportunities to customers nationwide under the name Fidelity ATM.  After a jury trial, Steinberg was found guilty of 1 count of conspiracy, 5 counts of mail fraud, and 4 counts of wire fraud, and Duffie was found guilty of 1 count of conspiracy and 1 count of mail fraud.  Fidelity ATM has no relationship to Fidelity Investments.

The federal securities laws prohibit, among other things, fraudulent conduct both civilly and criminally.

The SEC is responsible only for the civil and administrative enforcement of the federal securities laws.   In an SEC civil enforcement action filed in a United States District Court, the SEC can obtain a court order, among other things, enjoining a defendant from further violations of the securities laws, disgorgement of any money obtained from the illegal conduct, and in some circumstances, civil penalties.   In an administrative enforcement proceeding, the SEC can require a respondent to, among other things, cease and desist certain activities, disgorge illegal profits, and institute procedures to prevent further violations.  The SEC can also institute administrative disciplinary proceedings to, among other things, bar a broker-dealer or an investment adviser, bar an individual from associating with a broker-dealer or investment adviser, or bar a professional, such as an accountant or an attorney, from practice before the SEC.

The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) is charged with the responsibility of the criminal enforcement of the federal securities laws through the DOJ and the individual U.S. Attorney’s offices located throughout the country.  In certain situations, the SEC and the DOJ undertake to investigate possible violations of the federal securities laws simultaneously.  In parallel civil and criminal proceedings, it is common for the SEC to share information and to coordinate their investigations with parallel criminal investigations conducted by the DOJ when appropriate.   A defendant in a criminal securities fraud prosecution may be subject to criminal fines, restitution, and imprisonment.  A criminal prosecution does not preclude the SEC from taking civil and administrative enforcement action.

Schoeppl Law, P.A. has utilized its unique securities regulatory experience to represent clients in parallel civil and criminal investigations and prosecutions and in criminal investigations and prosecutions that arise out securities matters in a wide variety of contexts ranging from cooperating witnesses to defendants who are indicted in criminal securities fraud prosecutions in federal court.