Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
United States of America v. Irene Michelle Fike
Date: 06-10-2025
Case Number: 24-CR-1
Judge: Gregory F. Van Tatenhove
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky (Fayette County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Lexington
Defendant's Attorney: Rachel Yavelak and Russell Baldani
Description:
Lexington, Kentucky criminal defense lawyers represented the Defend charged with fraud.
From 2016 to 2021, Fike worked at an accounting firm, where she performed bookkeeping tasks for one of the firm's clients, J.M. and J.M.'s family. When Fike left the firm in 2021, J.M. hired her as an independent contractor, entrusting her to pay bills, update financial records, and complete other bookkeeping tasks. Fike exploited her position, first at the accounting firm and then as an independent contractor, to defraud J.M. Fike used her access to J.M.'s financial accounts at Morgan Stanley and WinFirst Financial to pay Fike's personal credit card bills. She also used J.M.'s financial information and means of identification to buy items from online retailers, such as, Kohls and Amazon. To conceal her fraud and avoid arousing the family's suspicions, Fike misrepresented J.M.'s expenditures and debits in financial reports. Fike continued her fraudulent conduct even after she stopped working for J.M. around February
2022. Between April 2018 and September 2022, Fike defrauded J.M. of $363,657.67.
In 2024, Fike pleaded guilty to a two-count information charging her with wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. The district court subsequently sentenced Fike to thirty-six months' imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release. It also ordered her to pay J.M. $405,867.08 in restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 ("MVRAâ€), 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. This sum
included the principal amount of $363,657.67, plus $42,209.41 in prejudgment interest, which the district court considered necessary to make J.M. whole. The district court waived post-judgment interest. Fike timely appealed, arguing that the MVRA does not authorize prejudgment interest and that the amount of prejudgment interest ordered by the district court is speculative.
From 2016 to 2021, Fike worked at an accounting firm, where she performed bookkeeping tasks for one of the firm's clients, J.M. and J.M.'s family. When Fike left the firm in 2021, J.M. hired her as an independent contractor, entrusting her to pay bills, update financial records, and complete other bookkeeping tasks. Fike exploited her position, first at the accounting firm and then as an independent contractor, to defraud J.M. Fike used her access to J.M.'s financial accounts at Morgan Stanley and WinFirst Financial to pay Fike's personal credit card bills. She also used J.M.'s financial information and means of identification to buy items from online retailers, such as, Kohls and Amazon. To conceal her fraud and avoid arousing the family's suspicions, Fike misrepresented J.M.'s expenditures and debits in financial reports. Fike continued her fraudulent conduct even after she stopped working for J.M. around February
2022. Between April 2018 and September 2022, Fike defrauded J.M. of $363,657.67.
In 2024, Fike pleaded guilty to a two-count information charging her with wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. The district court subsequently sentenced Fike to thirty-six months' imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release. It also ordered her to pay J.M. $405,867.08 in restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 ("MVRAâ€), 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. This sum
included the principal amount of $363,657.67, plus $42,209.41 in prejudgment interest, which the district court considered necessary to make J.M. whole. The district court waived post-judgment interest. Fike timely appealed, arguing that the MVRA does not authorize prejudgment interest and that the amount of prejudgment interest ordered by the district court is speculative.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of United States of America v. Irene Michelle Fike?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard United States of America v. Irene Michelle Fike?
This case was heard in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky (Fayette County), KY. The presiding judge was Gregory F. Van Tatenhove.
Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Irene Michelle Fike?
Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Lexington. Defendant's attorney: Rachel Yavelak and Russell Baldani.
When was United States of America v. Irene Michelle Fike decided?
This case was decided on June 10, 2025.