US vs. Peter Stasica
US vs. Peter Stasica
US vs. Peter Stasica
rNFoRMArroN
r8
u.s.c, $ 1343
)
)
1,
PETER STASICA,
did knowingly and intentionally devise and execute a scheme and artifice to defraud University of Minnesota Medical Center
obtain monoy by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises,
2,
Over the time-frame identified above, defendant, who was then Prosthetics
Manager for Fairview's Ofihotics and Prosthetics Department, began removing without authorization from Fairview prosthetics and prosthetic-related supplies (e,g. prosthetic
liners, prosthetic socks) to sell on EBay,
cttE[t
JUDGMENT
u. s. ols-f
0 8 2013
FlE-couE!914U!
ENTDDEPUTYCTERfi-*-
3.
prosthetics they were not using. Defendant would not disclose that he intended to sell,
and did sell, their prosthetics on EBay
4.'
On or about June 14, 20II, in the State and District of Minnesota, the
defendant, for the pu{pose of executing the scheme and artifice to defraud, did cause to
be transmitted in interstate comrnerce, by means of wire communication, certain signals
'and
North Dakota to defendant in Minnesota via PayPal for payment for a prosthetic.
5. 6,
orfeiture Allegations
set forth herein by reference, for the purpose of alleging forfeitures pursuant to
Title
18,
United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United States Code, Section
246r(c),
7.
of this information,
the
Section 981(a)(l)(C), and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1343.
^,,
8, If
the United States intends to seek the forfeiture of substitute property as provided for in
Title 21, United States Code, Section 8530), as incorporated by Title 28, United
Code, Section 2a61@),
States
Respectfu
lly submitted,