ACCEPTED
04-15-00691-CV
FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
11/6/2015 4:14:49 PM
KEITH HOTTLE
CLERK
NO. 04-15-00691-CV
FILED IN
Fourth Court of Appeals 4thSANCOURT OF APPEALS
ANTONIO, TEXAS
San Antonio, Texas 11/6/2015 4:14:49 PM
KEITH E. HOTTLE
__________________________________________________________________
Clerk
ARMANDO HERNANDEZ and NANCY HERNANDEZ, Appellants,
V.
MARIO SALDIVAR and FERNANDO SALDIVAR, Appellees.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
APPELLEES’ RESPONSE TO APPELLANTS’ MOTION
TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Case No. 2014-CI-17077
Honorable Barbara Nellermoe, Presiding
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Jeffrey A. Hiller
State Bar No. 00790883
jhiller@ccn-law.com
CACHEAUX, CAVAZOS & NEWTON, LLP
333 Convent Street
San Antonio, Texas 78212
(210) 222-1642
Royal B. Lea, III
State Bar No. 12069680
royal@binghamandlea.com
BINGHAM & LEA, P.C.
319 Maverick Street
San Antonio, Texas 78212
(210) 224-1819
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEES,
MARIO SALDIVAR AND FERNANDO
SALDIVAR
Introduction
The Court should deny the Motion to Extend for two reasons. First,
Appellants offer no reason or excuse at all for failing to file the notice of
appeal on time. And second, Appellants should not rewarded for their
conduct described below.
Argument
First, Appellants offer no reason or excuse for failing to file a notice
of appeal within ninety days of the judgment. They offer the excuse that
their counsel miscalculated the deadline for filing a supplement to a motion
for new trial in the trial court. But nothing about that excuse or
miscalculation provides any reason or excuse for their not timely filing a
notice of appeal on or by the 90-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal
(after filing a motion for new trial) in this Court. There is simply no reason
offered for why Appellants failed to file a timely notice of appeal. Without
even the attempt to explain their failure to meet the deadline, the Motion to
Extend should be denied.
Second, Appellants seek leave to file a late notice to appeal the Hon.
Barbara Nellermoe’s order granting final summary judgment against them
for fraud, conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty, among other things.
Given the extraordinary facts of this case, and the unparalleled duplicitous
2
conduct by the Herandezes, leave should be denied. This Court has some
familiarity with the underlying circumstances. See case numbers 04-15-
00129-CV and 04-15-00132-CV in this Court.
Armando Hernandez is an admitted, infamous, treacherous thief who
used the Catholic Church to victimize the Saldivars and their family. He not
only betrayed the Saldivar’s trust and stole the Saldivars’ family savings and
business funds, but he (with the assistance of Nancy Hernandez) violated
trial court orders and used the Saldivars’ stolen funds to hire lawyers (no
doubt, including their recently hired counsel) to escape the consequences of
his admittedly criminal conduct.
In fact, Armando Hernandez has been charged and is being prosecuted
by the United States of America in Case No. 15-cr-00185, styled United
States of America v. Armando Jesus Hernandez, United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division. In that case,
Hernandez has pleaded guilty, and has already admitted he stole $45M from
the Saldivars, and owes them at least that much. A copy of the written plea
agreement between Hernandez and the United States Government in which
Hernandez admits he owes the Saldivar family more than $45 million in
restitution is submitted with this Response.
Although Appellants offer no explanation for missing the deadline for
filing a notice of appeal, they do refer to their untimely supplement to their
3
motion for new trial in the trial court. In their motion for new trial, they say
they owe the Saldivars less than the $36 million awarded in the summary
judgment. In fact, now in their late filed supplemental motion for new trial
they say the overpaid the Saldivars by mere $4 million. Appellees ask the
Court to take judicial notice of the motion the Appellants filed in the trial
court on November 3, 2015, not for the truth of what the Hernandezes say,
but only to see the glaring inconsistency between that motion and the guilty
plea in federal court. The Hernandezes entirely fail to tell this Court (and
entirely failed to tell the trial court) that Armando Hernandez has already
admitted in his guilty plea in his federal criminal case that the actual amount
they owe is more than $45 million. Amazingly, the Hernandezes say in their
November 3 Motion in the trial Court they gave the FBI the documents that
show their overpayment by more than $4 million, but entirely fail to mention
or explain the guilty plea and admission of restitution of more than $45
million.
The Hernandezes chose to use the time since they hired their new
counsel to misdirect the trial Court with a story about why they owe less than
$36 million when, in fact, there is a judicial admission in federal court that
they actually owe more than $36 million. They should not be rewarded for
their duplicity.
As they have done throughout this litigation (after repeatedly invoking
4
their Fifth Amendment privilege and refusing to testify or provide any
information), the Hernandezes essentially ask the Courts to give them more
time after they have waited until after the last minute to hire lawyers. And
then the Hernandezes once again show their utter inability to show any
candor to the Court. Leave should be denied.
Prayer for Relief
Accordingly, Appellees respectfully request this Honorable Court to d e n y
l e a v e t o extend the time for A p p e l l a n t s ’ f i l i n g o f t h e i r Notice of
Appeal. Appellees pray for such other and further relief, at law or in equity, as
to which they shall show themselves justly entitled.
5
Respectfully submitted,
Cacheaux, Cavazos, & Newton, LLP
333 Convent Street
San Antonio, Texas 78205
(210) 222-1642 Telephone
(210) 222-2453 Facsimile
jhiller@ccn-law.com
Bingham & Lea, P.C.
319 Maverick Street
San Antonio, Texas 78212
(210) 224-1819 Telephone
(210) 224-0141 Facsimile
royal@binghamandlea.com
By: /s/ Royal B. Lea, III
JEFFREY A. HILLER
State Bar No. 00790883
ROYAL B. LEA, III
State Bar No. 12069680
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
MARIO SALDIVAR and FERNANDO
SALDIVAR
6
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has
been forwarded on this 6th day of November, 2015, via the electronic service system
provided through Texas.gov to Appellees’ counsel and all other counsel in this matter:
Ricardo G. Cedillo Gilberto A. Siller
rcedillo@lawdcm.com gsiller@sillerlaw.com
Isaac J. Huron THE SILLER LAW FIRM
ihuron@lawdcm.com 1580 S. Main Street, Ste. 200
DAVIS, CEDILLO & MENDOZA INC Boerne, Texas 78006
755 E. Mulberry Ave., Ste. 500
San Antonio, Texas 78212 Receiver
Counsel for Appellants,
Armando Hernandez and Nancy
Hernandez
/s/ Royal B. Lea, III
JEFFREY A. HILLER
ROYAL B. LEA, III
7
IN THE VNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TE AS
SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
UC'IITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) CRIMINAL NO. SA-15-CR-185-DAE
)
)
ARMANDO JESUS HERNANDEZ LEAL, )
)
Defendant. )
PLEA AGREEMENT
The T:nited States Attorney for the Western District of T xas, by and through the
undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, and the Defend t, ARMANDO JESUS
HERNANDEZ LEAL, personally and by and through Alfonso abanas, Attorney for the
Defendant, enter into the following plea bargain at,'l'eement pursuant to Rule ll(c)(l), l'ederal
Rules of Criminal Procedure:
Defendant's Agreement to Plead Guiltv
Defendant agrees to plead guilty to Count Eight of the Supe seding Indictment, whi~h
charges him with the offense of money laundering, in violation of Tit e 18, United States Code
§§!956(a)(l)(B) and 2, on or about November 27,2013.
Punishment
The offense to which the Defendant is pleading guilty carries th following penalties:
a. Maximum prison term: 20 years
b. Maximum fine: $250,000.00
c. Maximum term of supervised release: 3 years
I
r-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. A mandatory monetary assessment in the amount of $100.00.
Any term of imprisonment is not subject to parole.
Advice of Rights, Collateral Consequences, and Waiver of Rights
The Defendant understands that he has the following rights:
I. The right to plead not guilty, or having already so pleaded, to persist in that plea;
2. The right to a trial by jury;
3. The rights at trial to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses; to be protected
from compelled selt~incrimination (the right to remain silent); to testify and present
evidence; and to compel the attendance of witnesses;
4. The right to be represented by counsel-and if necessary to have the court appoint
counsel at public expense-at trial and at every other stage of the proceeding.
By pleading guilty, the Defendant understands that he waives and gives up the first three
categories of the rights listed above: the right to plead not guilty, the right to a jury trial, and the
rights to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, to remain silent, Lo testify and present
witnesses, and to compel the attendance of witnesses at trial. By pleading guilty the Defendant
gives up his right to remain silent and convicts himself; there will be no jury trial; no witnesses to
prove guilt; no cross-examination or confrontation of witnesses; no opportunity to testifY and
present evidence; and no opportunity to compel the attendance of witnesses. The Court may
require the Defendant to answer truthfully questions about the offense, and the Defendant may be
prosecuted if he knowingly makes false statements or gives false answers.
The Defendant understands that in addition to the punishment described above, his guilty
plea and conviction may have other or collateral consequences. These consequences may
adversely affect such things as the Defendant's right to possess firearms, the right to vote, as well
2
as the immigration status of a defendant who is not a U.S. Citizen. For example, a plea of guilty
could result in the loss of a defendant's visa, permanent resident alien status, or other basis for
being in the U.S., the deportation or removal of the defendant from the United States, the denial of
naturalization, or the ability to ever lawfully enter the U.S. Defendant has discussed with his
attorney the punishments and consequences of pleading guilty, understands that not all of the
consequences can be predicted or foreseen, and still wants to plead guilty in this case.
In addition to giving up the rights described above, the Defendant agrees to give up and
waive the following:
Pretrial Motions: The Defendant understands that he could raise a number of issues and
challenges by pretrial motion, including motions to suppress evidence and to dismiss the
charges against him. By ente1ing into this agreement and pleading guilty, the Defendant
agrees to give up any and all claims he has made or might have made by pretrial motion,
and agrees to the dismissal of any motions that currently are pending.
Discovery: In addition to waiving pretrial motions, the Defendant agrees to give up and
waive any claims he may have now or may acquire later to any information possessed by
the prosecution team that might be subject to disclosure under discovery rules, including
the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedw·e, the .lenck~ Act, local court rules, and Court
Orders, including inf01mation that might be considered exculpatory or impeaching under
Brady v. Maryland, and Giglio v. United States.
Appeal: Ibe Defendant agrees to waive and give up his right to appeal his conviction or
sentence on any ground, except in a case in which the sentence imposed by the Court is
greater than the maximum sentence authorized by statute.
Collateral Attack: The Defendant agrees to waive and give up his right to challenge his
3
conviction or sentence in a post-conviction collateral challenge, including but not limited
to a proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 and 2255; except, the Defendant does not
waive his right to raise a challenge based on ineffective assistance of counsel and
prosecutorial misconduct. In the event the Defendant makes such a claim, he hereby agrees
to waive any claim of attorney/client privilege arising from counsel's representation.
Attorneys' Fees: The Defendant hereby stipulates and agrees that he is not entitled to and
shall not seek from the United States any attorneys' fees he incurred in connection with this
prosecution.
Defendant's Agreement on Restitution
The Defendant agrees to be held liable to pay restitution to the Saldivar family in lhe
amount of $45,868,260.69.
Defendant's Agreement to Cooperate
The Defendant agrees to cooperate with the U.S. Attorney's Office, and with law
enforcement agents as directed by the U.S. Attorney's Office, as follows:
Defendant agrees to make a good faith effort to pay any fine, forfeiture, or restitution
ordered by the Court.
Before or after sentencing, the Defendant agrees to provide, upon request by the Court, the
U.S. Attorney's Office, or the U.S. Probation Office, in whatever form requested, accurate
and complete financial information, and to submit sworn statements and give depositions
under oath concerning all assets and his ability to pay.
The Defendant also agrees to surrender and release any assets, money, or other property,
whether or not derived from the commission of crimes, as well as any infonnation about
said assets, in order to satisfy any fine, forfeiture or restitution order entered by the Court.
4
This includes signing any waivers, consents, or releases required by third parties.
The Defendant agrees to identify any transfer of assets made for the purpose of evading or
defeating financial obligations, and to refrain from making any such transfers.
If the Defendant agrees to restitution, or if the Court orders restitution, the Defendant
agrees to the immediate sale of any properties he owns and that the proceeds of those sales
shall be applied to any order of restitution. Defendant agrees to take any reasonable
actions requested by the government to facilitate payment of restitution.
The Defendant further agrees to cooperate \vith the U.S. Attorney's Office and law enforcement
authorities as requested in the investigation and prosecution of other criminal offenses. That
cooperation includes, but is not limited to, the foiiO\ving:
I. Provide complete and truthful information to the U.S. Attomey's Otlice and law
enforcement officers about Defendant's knowledge of any and all criminal activities of all
persons, including all documents or other materials requested by the government,
including permission to access materials held by third parties;
2. Provide truthful testimony in any grand jury, trial or other proceeding;
3. Request continuances of sentencing hearings as necessary, until the cooperation has
been completed;
4. Disclose any contacts \vith co-defendants or subjects of any investigation, including
altorneys and others acting on their behalf;
5. Refrain from committing any additional criminal offenses, and comply with conditions
of release imposed by the Court;
6. Cooperate \vith the government to identify, surrender, and forfeit any assets the
Defendant obtained directly or indirectly from or used to facilitate illegal conduct.
5
In exchange for Defendant's cooperation in the investigation ami prosecution of other
offenses, the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Texas agrees that:
1. The government will not use any truthful statements, testimony or information
provided by the Defendant pursuant to this agreement against the Defendant at sentencing
or as the basis for further prosecution, except as provided below.
Exceptions: (A) Absent written moditlcation, this agreement not to usc statements docs not
apply to information pertaining to any death, sexual assault, murder or felony crime of
violence; (B) Statements or information may be used in: (I) cross-examination or rebuttal
in any proceeding in which the Defendant makes a statement; (ii) any prosecution against
the Defendant for perjury, making false statements, or obstruction of justice; (iii) in
response to any motion or pleading made by the Defendant where the information is
relevant to an issue raised by the Defendant; (iv) for any purpose if the Defendant breaches
this agreement; or (v) submission to the Court or Probation Office for any purpose other
than calculating the advisory Guideline range or determining appropriate sentence.
2. At the time of sentencing, and after the imposition of sentences if the U.S. Attorney's
Oflice determines that circumstances warrant, the government will make known to the
sentencing court the nature and extent of the Defendant's cooperation and assistance to law
enforcement authorities. It is within the sole discretion of the U.S. Attorney's Office to
determine whether to file motions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), U.S.S.G. SKI.l, and/or
Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, requesting the sentencing court to depart
from a supervisory guidelines range, impose sentence below a mandatory punishment, or
reduce a sentence already imposed, and if so, the extent of such departure, variance or
reduction of sentence. The Defendant understands that the decision to seek a reduced
6
sentence is not contingent upon the conviction of any other person, and further, that the
extent of any departure, variance or reduction of sentence is within the sole discretion of
the Court.
Government's Agreement
In exchange for Defendant's agreement to plead guilty, waive the rights listed above, and to
cooperate, the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Texas agrees to the
following:
Forebear Filing Charges: The government agrees that it shall 110t pursue additional
charges against the Defendant that arise from the facts surrounding the commission of this
ofiensc and which are known or which reasonably could have been known to the U.S.
Attorney's Office prior to entering this plea bargain agreement, or which are disclosed by
the Det(mdant during his truthful debriefing or cooperation with the U.S. Attorney's Office.
Sentencing: Subject to the government's obligation to provide all relevant information to
the sentencing court, and to the extent consistent with that information, the government
agrees as follows:
Acceptance of Responsibility: The government will recommend that the
Defendant receive a three level downward adjustment for acceptance of
responsihi lity.
Sentence Recommendation: The government will recommend that the Court
impose a sentence at the low end of the Sentencing Guideline range found by the
Court.
Forfeiture: In the interests of providing full restitution to the victims of this
offense, the Government will forgo any forfeiture as set out in the indictment.
7
Regarding the imposition of sentence, the Defendant understands that the Court decideR the
punishment that will be imposed. The Court shall determine the sentence to be imposed in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), after considering the application of the Sentencing
Guidelines. The Guidelines are advisory and not binding, although the Court is required
to consider them. Any prediction or estimate of the probable sentencing range or
ultimate sentence that rna)' be imposed, whether from the government, bislber
attorney, or the Probation Office, is not a promise, is not binding, and is not an
inducement for the Defendant's guilty plea or waivers. The Defendant will not be
permitted to withdraw his guilty plea because the sentence imposed differs from the
sentence he/she expected or hoped for.
Notwithstanding the above provisions, both the government and the Defendant reserve the rights
to: (1) inform the U.S. Probation Office and the Court of all information relevant to determining
sentence; (2) dispute facts relevant to sentencing; (3) seek resolution of disputed facts or factors in
conference with opposing counsel and the U.S. Probation Office; (4) allocute at sentencing
(consistent with promises by the government concerning recommended findings and punishment);
and (5) request the Court to depart from the applicable supervisory guideline range based upon
aggravating or mitigating factors.
Breach of Agreement
In the event the Defendant violates or breaches any of the terms of the plea agreement,
including his agreement to cooperate, the government will be released from its obligations under
this agreement and in its sole discretion may do any or all of the following:
I. Move to set aside the Defendant's guilty plea and proceed on charges previously filed
and any additional charges;
8
2. Use against the Defendant any statements or information provided by Defendant
during the course of his cooperation, at sentencing or in any prosecution;
3. Seek additional charges based on false statements, perjury, obstruction of justice, or
any other criminal acts committed by Defendant before or during his cooperation,
including offenses disclosed during Defendant's cooperation;
4. Seek to revoke or modiJY conditions of release;
5. Decline to tile a motion for a reduced sentence.
Defendant's breach ofthis agreement wilJ not entitle him to withdraw a guilty plea already entered.
Factual Basis for the Guilty Plea
If the Defendant went to trial on the charge to which he agrees to plead guilty, the
Defendant agrees that the government's evidence would prove the following, establishing proof
beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the elements of the crime charged:
';r In 2006, ARMANDO JESUS HERNANDEZ LEAL (hereinafter HERNANDEZ)
( presented Mario Saldivar (hereinafter M. Saldivar) with what HERNANDEZ purported to be an
investment opportunity through the company, Investment Professionals, Inc. (!PI) located in San
Antonio, Texas. HERNANDEZ told M. Saldivar that Sunport Capital, an investment ±lrm
which HERNANDEZ claimed that he had 15% ownership in, would service M. Saldivar's account
with !PI. The trust M, Saldivar had in HERt'lANDEZ was instrumental in Saldivar's decision to
invest with IPI through Sunport Capital. In 2006, M. Saldivar invested $500,000.
M. Saldivar made subsequent investments with IPJ through HERNANDEZ. In addition,
1\1. Saldivar's two brothers, Jorge Saldivar and Femando Saldivar, also businessmen, decided to
invest with HERNANDEZ. M. Saldivar's mother Myrthala Saldivar and M. Saldivar's
brother-in-law, Jorge Calderon, also invested with HERNAJ\DEZ. Between 2005 and 2014, M.
9
Saldivar and his family invested approximately $50 million with HERNANDEZ. During this
time, HERNANDEZ emailed monthly account statements to M. Saldivar. The account
statements were provided toM. Saldivar in an English language format. M. Saldivar's primary
language is Spanish and he has limited understanding of English. Based on the account statements,
M. Saldivar and his family continued to invest money with HERNA~DEZ.
On or about November 4, 2013, M. Saldivar received an email from HERNANDEZ's
gmail accotmt containing an attached Account Statement for M. Saldivar's company, Asser
Global, Inc., for the month of October 2013. The Account Statement had an IPI letterhead and
listed Sunport Capital as the office servicing the account and Pershing Securities Corp. as the
clearance agent. The Account Statement provided a listing of the asset allocation, portfolio
holdings, and transactions forM. Saldivar's investment. M. Saldivar's margin debt was listed as
$65 million on the first page of the statement. The margin debt had a 6% interest rate.
HERNANDEZ led M. Saldivar to believe he owed monthly interest payments on this margin debt
\ that had been extended to him by Pershing Securities Corp. In fact, and unknown to M. Saldivar,
I the Account Statement attached to the email was fraudulent in its entirety and had been
manufactured by HERNADNEZ to induce M. Saldivar's payment~.
On or about November 13, 2013, M. Saldivar sent a wire transfer from his bank account in
Mexico in the amount of$50,000 to a Frost Bank account own~d by Capital in Movement, LLC.
Capital in Movement is a company that is controlled by HERNANDEZ. On or about November
14, 2013, M. Saldivar sent a wire transfer Jrom his bank account in Mexico in the amount of
$50,000 to the Capital in Movement, LLC account. These wire transfers represented a portion of
the monthly interest payments on the margin debt M. Saldivar believed had been extended to him
by Pershing Securities. M. Saldivar believed Capital in Movement, LLC was collecting these
10
payments as an Advisor of Sunport Capital. M. Saluivar expected these interest payments to be
made to Pershing Securities.
In 2014, HERNANDEZ subsequently admitted that he had been committing a fraud on the
Saldivar family and that he was responsible for the loss of the Saldivar family funds.
HERNANDEZ asked M. Saldivar for forgiveness and requested he take care of HERNANDEZ's
wife and children. M. Saldivar told HERNANDEZ he was forgiven, but requested a setllement
be handled through their attorneys. On September 12, 2014, HERNANDEZ sent a formal
confession from his HERNANDEZj.hernandez@gmail.com email account to members of the
Saldivar family and his wife, which read as follows [Email has been translated from Spanish to
English]:
"Dear family,
I would like to offer you an apology and admit to the following:
1. I asked you to send money through accounts in Mexico and the United States to have it
invested in your accounts.
2. The money was not invested in any way.
3. The investments shown on the statements sent to your emai I addresses do not exist, nor are
they under the company shown in the statement.
4. I prepared the statements and they are completely false.
5. I used the money for my personal benefit.
6. I 'm willfully preparing this statement to avoid publicity and your filing a criminal
complaint. I promise I will give you back your money in cash, assets, and properties. This
transfer will start on Monday, September 15, 2014.
7. First thing on Monday, I will talk to Atty. Briseno to initiate the transfers and process.
11
Sincerely,
Armando .T. Hernandez"
Examination of the bank records has determined that HERNANDEZ directed M. Saldivar
and other members of his family to deposit money into an account at Frost Bank entitled the
"Capital in Movement" account. The Capital in Movement account belonged to Capital in
Movement LLC, a company established by HERNANDEZ. Gregorio Medina (Medina) and
Jessica Castillo (Castillo), employees of HERNANDEZ, were the signatoties for this account.
Once money was deposited, HERNANDEZ would direct the transfer of the money to other
entities, most often to two other Frost bank accounts; one belonging to Regina Capital Investment
LLC (Regina), and the other belonging to Corporate Values Management, LLC (Corporate
Values). Regina was formed by Medina. Medina and Castillo are listed as the managers and
accountant Juan Carlos Almanza (Almanza) is listed as the registered agent. Similarly, Corporate
Values was formed by Medina. Medina and Castillo arc listed as the managers and Almanza is
listed as the registered agent. Although Medina and Castillo were employees of HERNANDEZ
at the time that the companies were formed and the accounts were opened at Frost Bank,
HERNANDEZ's name is not associated with the paperwork for either the companies or the
accounts during this petiod and his ownership interest is concealed.
Once money was transferred from the Capital in Movement account to either the Regina or
Corporate Values accounts, the money would then be used to pay the personal expenses of
HERNANDEZ, including loans, meeting payroll, paying Vetizon and AT&T bills, utility and
credit card bills, and transfers to other of IffiRNANDEZ's personal accounts. The Regina and
Corporate Values accounts were designed solely to conceal the transfer of money from the Capital
in Movement account to HERNANDEZ's personal use.
12
On November 27, 2013, HERNANDEZ directed that $37,000.00, money previously
received through the fraudulent scheme from M. Saldivar, be transferred from the Capital in
Movement account to the Regina account. The transfer was accomplished on that date and the
money was subsequently used to pay HERNANDEZ's personal debts.
HERNANTIEZ was aware that the funds being transferred to the Regina account on the
date in question were the proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, to wit: wire fraud. He
knowingly conducted the transaction with the intent to conceal the true source, ownership and
control ofthe proceeds.
Voluntariness
In entering into this Plea Bargain Agreement, agreeing to plead guilty, and waiving the
rights set forth above, the Defendant affirms the follo~~ving:
I. The Defendant has diswssed with his attorney the charges, the possible punishment
upon conviction, the evidence and any defenses to the charges, and the benefits and risks of
going to trial.
2. The Defendant understands that he has a right to plead not guilty, and by entering this
agreement and pleading guilty he is waiving or giving up a nun1ber of important rights,
described above.
3. The Defendant has had sufficient time to discuss lhe case with his attorney, and is
satistied with the advice given by counsel.
4. The Defendant is not under the influence of alcohol, drugs or medicines and
understands the gravamen of the proceedings and the importance of the decision to plead
guilty and waive rights.
13
5. The Defendant enters this agreement and decision to plead guilty voluntarily, and not
on account of force, threats, promises or inducements, apart from the promises and
inducements set forth in this agreement.
6. The Defendant agrees to plead guilty because he is guilty ofthe offense charged.
Entire Agreement
This Plea Bargain Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Defendant and
the United States Attorney's Office and is binding only upon those parties. No other promises,
inducements or agreements have been made or entered into between the parties. The Court may
accept or reject this agreement, and may defer this decision until it has reviewed the pre-sentence
repm1. If the Court accepts the agreement, but declines to follow the government's sentencing
recommendations, the Defendant has no right to withdraw his guilty plea.
DATE I 1
~ -- rz-o - 2-c r
DATE
Defendant
14
Armando Hernandez and Nancy Hernandez v. Mario Saldivar, Fernando Saldivar, Jorge Calderon, and Jorge Saldivar
Combined Opinion