Two Romanian Nationals Charged With Bank Fraud And Identity Theft Offenses

SCRANTON – The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that Costel Aparaschivei, age 35, a Romanian national, was indicted by a federal grand jury on June 25, 2019, for conspiring to commit and committing bank fraud, and with aggravated identity theft.  In a related case, Daniel Gologan, age 29, also a Romanian national, was charged in a criminal information on June 26, 2019, for conspiring to commit bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.

According to United States Attorney David J. Freed, the indictment and information charge Aparaschivei and Gologan with conspiring to commit bank fraud between October 6, 2018 and October 21, 2018.  Aparaschivei was charged with six counts of bank fraud during that time period, and two counts of aggravated identity.  Gologan also was charged with a single count of aggravated identity theft.

The indictment and information allege that the defendants obtained counterfeit debit cards bearing stolen account numbers and PINs in New York, and transported them to South Abington, Pennsylvania.  In Pennsylvania, the defendants used the counterfeit debit cards at Penn East Federal Credit Union and attempted to withdraw approximately $140,360.  The defendants successfully withdrew $66,510.

The matter was investigated by the United States Secret Service and by the South Abington Township Police Department.  Assistant United States Attorney Phillip J. Caraballo is prosecuting the cases.

Indictments and informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

The maximum penalties under federal law for the most serious charges are up to 30 years of imprisonment.  The aggravated identity theft charges carry mandatory, consecutive two-year terms of imprisonment.  Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant's educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.

# # #