THE ROGER C. WILSON LAW FIRM, PC
  • HOME
  • Our Firm
    • LOCATION/DIRECTIONS
  • Our People
    • ROGER C. WILSON
    • FRANCES L. SPINELLI
    • ANGELA STROUGAL
    • SARA J. WILSON
  • Our Practice
    • BUSINESS LITIGATION
    • CRIMINAL DEFENSE / GOVERNMENT ENFOREMENT >
      • Drug Cases
      • White Collar
      • RICO
      • Regulatory Offenses
      • Firearms Offenses
      • DUI
    • CIVIL LITIGATION
    • APPELLATE

July 27th, 2018

7/27/2018

0 Comments

 

TWO ATLANTA BUSINESSMEN SENTENCED EACH TO A DECADE IN PRISON IN FEDERAL SECURITIES FRAUD CASE; WILSONLAW CLIENT SENTENCED TO 24 MONTHS IN SAME CASE

Picture

www.ajc.com/news/local/doj-two-metro-atlanta-men-convicted-million-fraud-scheme/H6MJ5ITBIEuYS4VaCpjRUL/?icmp=np_inform_variation-control
Two metro-Atlanta businessmen, William Goldstein and Marc Bercoon, were sentenced each to ten years in prison this week after their convictions for securities fraud and related crimes in federal court in Atlanta.  A third defendant in the case, Peter Veugeler, was represented by The Roger C. Wilson Law Firm, PC, which negotiated a resolution of the case for him with prosecutors before trial.  As a result of that resolution, Wilson client, Mr. Veugeler, was sentenced to 24 months, two days after the other sentencings.  United States v. Marc Bercoon, et al. 1:15-CR-00022 (US Dist Ct ND Ga).   
 
Atlanta entrepreneur Goldstein and his business colleague, and Atlanta lawyer, Bercoon, were convicted by a federal jury in February of twelve counts of conspiracy, securities fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud.  Pursuant to the resolution of the case for him, Mr. Veugeler pled guilty to a single conspiracy count.  All three men were charged in connection with several groups of transactions in which newly issued stock of a formerly private company was sold to public investors on the over-the-counter market.  The indictment charged that the men illegally marketed and sold the shares, in ways improperly designed to increase the demand for and sale prices of the stock.  Prosecutors asserted losses of well over $4 million, although that amount was challenged by all three defendants and ultimately was determined by the Court to be significantly lesser.
 
Common sense might suggest that for a company selling its stock into the public market, doing so in ways that would increase the demand for and trading prices of the stock (and thus of the money raised by the equity financing) would be not only an acceptable but also a universal approach.    But however common it may be, prosecutors charged that the transactions in this case violated the federal prohibition of so-called “manipulative trading” under the federal securities laws.  That prohibition is very broad and applies to share placement and trading practices that have the intent and result of affecting the trading price or volume of the stock, or of giving an inaccurate impression of a broader interest or activity in the stock than actually exists.
 
Roger C. Wilson practices extensively in the area of federal white collar criminal defense.  He has represented numerous persons charged with a variety of financial crimes, including securities fraud, bank fraud, and loan and mortgage fraud, in negotiating resolutions of the charges and in representing such persons at trial.
0 Comments

GUN STORE OWNER PREEMPTS GOVERNMENT RAID

3/15/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Nicely demonstrating smart, creative, proactive lawyering in the criminal defense context, an attorney representing a California gun store owner has preemptively obtained a federal court order forbidding the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to carry out a threatened raid of the owner's store, Ares Armor, to confiscate products and customer information.  ATF had demanded that the business owner disclose information and records concerning all customers who had bought so-called “80% lower receivers” from the store.  These are small parts that can be combined with numerous other parts to assemble a finished firearm.  The parts are not considered firearms and neither they nor their sale is illegal, provided they are manufactured to specifications prescribed by ATF.  Reportedly, the versions possessed and being sold by Ares did not meet those specifications, and therefore ATF demanded to seize not only the Ares inventory, but also Ares’s customers information.  Ares was willing to hand over the inventory but refused to provide information on its customers, which it said would violate the privacy rights of the customers and Ares.  The Ares owner alleges that ATF agents threatened that if he did not turn over all such information, the agents would raid all his stores and bring criminal charges against him and his staff, effectively destroying his business.

It was in response to the asserted Government threat that Ares sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) prohibiting the ATF from carrying out the threat.  A U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of California granted the order requested by Ares.  The TRO will remain in place to protect Ares until a forthcoming hearing on whether that protection will be made more permanent.

Seeking to restrain the threatened raid by the federal agency means of a preemptive TRO is a creative, and so far here, effective, method of preemptively protecting one’s Constitutional rights against an imminent threat to them by Government authorities in the course of a purported criminal investigation.  The legal standards for extending that protection to a longer-term basis (in the form of a temporary or permanent injunction) are greater than those for obtaining the TRO, and thus the extension likely will be more difficult to obtain.  But for persons facing a threatened destruction of their business in retaliation for their assertion of Constitutional privacy rights, as purportedly is Ares here, the proactive move certainly seems to be at least a worthwhile strategy.  Experience suggests that the threat from ATF will be no greater because the owner chose this route than it would have been had he not.

Roger C. Wilson has represented a number of clients in connection with pending or threatened federal weapons- or firearms-related criminal charges.  He has obtained resolution of some of those cases after indictment; and in others, by becoming involved at an early stage, prior to indictment, he has succeeded in avoiding the bringing of such charges at all.  That these instances have involved consultations with and agreement by ATF agents does not mean that such a resolution always can be obtained in this way.  The California case well illustrates how other means can be used when necessary.

0 Comments

    BLOG

    Author

    The Roger C. Wilson
    Law Firm, PC

    Archives

    July 2018
    May 2018
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    Constitutional Rights
    Criminal Appeals
    Criminal Defense
    Federal Crime
    Financial Crime
    Firearms Guns Weapons
    Securities Fraud
    White Collar Crime

    RSS Feed

    Older Archives