Date: 01-16-2015

Case Style: United States of America v. RaeLeigh Day

Case Number: 4:14-cr-00196-BLW

Judge: Winmill

Court: United States District Court for the District of Idaho (Bannock County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Ann T Wick

Defendant's Attorney: Manuel Travis Murdoch

Description: Pocatello, ID - RaeLeigh Day, 42, of Burley, Idaho, was sentenced today in United States District Court to three years of probation for bankruptcy fraud, U.S. Attorney Wendy J. Olson announced. Day pleaded guilty to the charge on October 29, 2014.

According to the plea agreement, Day filed for bankruptcy in December 2009 and omitted from the filed petitions, schedules, and statement of financial affairs a Honda four-wheeler and a Honda ATV. Day’s electronic signatures verified the truthfulness of the filed documents under penalty of perjury. After a meeting of creditors, Day filed amended paperwork listing a 2005 Honda four-wheeler worth $480 and a 2004 Honda ATV worth $860, describing both vehicles as being in need of “major work.” Day again verified the information under penalty of perjury. When the Chapter 7 trustee requested information about the ATVs, Day provided a letter stating that the ATVs were wrecked and attached photographs of wrecked ATVs. The ATVs in the photographs, however, were not the ATVs in question in the bankruptcy proceeding. The chapter 7 trustee obtained possession of the actual ATVs and confirmed they were not the ATVs in the pictures. Day’s ATVs were in good condition, and the trustee sold them for $3,500. Day admitted in court that she provided the photographs and other false information with the intent to mislead and conceal the assets from the chapter 7 trustee, in order to influence or prevent the trustee from seizing and selling the ATVs in the course of the bankruptcy proceedings.

“Those who seek the protection of the U.S. bankruptcy court have a firm obligation to be truthful and to make appropriate disclosures,” said Olson. “This office is committed to seeking appropriate penalties for those who instead choose to conceal and mislead.”

The case was investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations.

Outcome: See above

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: