Legal Brief
Concise factual and evidentiary digest prepared for attorneys, investigators, or prosecutors to assess the matter in one session. This expanded version incorporates a complete enterprise analysis, fraud pattern outline, statutory mapping, and inter-actor coordination summary.
Core Narrative (Expanded)
Between April and July 2024, tenant Michael Gasio timely paid all rent obligations through verified channels—Wells Fargo e-deposit, cashier’s check, and certified USPS mail. Every payment is documented by bank records, tracking logs, and written acknowledgments from the property owner’s own agent.
Despite this unbroken payment history, the landlord Phat Tran, acting through agents Hanson Le and Anna Ly, falsely represented to the Court that no payments were received. This misrepresentation occurred after Tran personally texted that “Hanson has the check,” and after federal postal records demonstrated delivery into the Berkshire Hathaway Huntington Beach brokerage office.
During the same window, the property was quietly transitioned into a higher-priced short-term rental: listed on third-party travel platforms at an approximate 54% markup over the contracted rent. The eviction filing thus directly aligns with a financial motive to remove the tenant and capitalize on market demand.
The accumulated evidence—DocuSign audit logs, USPS tracking, bank verifications, email archives, text-message admissions, and photographic records—demonstrates a multi-actor enterprise pattern operating across real estate sales, property management, legal services, and construction repairs. This pattern satisfies both state-level fraud definitions and federal racketeering criteria.
This expanded brief provides investigators with a structured digest of the case, mapping each individual’s role, the statutory violations involved, and the corresponding predicate acts relevant to RICO analysis.
Actors and Roles (Expanded)
The following profiles provide a deeper analysis of each primary individual involved in the events, clarifying their operational responsibilities, knowledge position, and the specific conduct that elevated the matter from a landlord–tenant dispute to a multi-actor fraud enterprise. Each profile consolidates statutory exposure, evidentiary posture, and behavioral indicators of scienter (knowledge of wrongdoing).
Role: Property Owner and Financial Beneficiary
Key Conduct: Accepted payments via private account for three years, denied receipt after
agent confirmed possession, misrepresented facts in court filings, instructed intermediaries not to disclose
the check receipt, later raised rent by more than 25% in violation of California emergency price-gouging law.
Impact: Directly benefited from eviction; documents show motive tied to relisting as an
unlicensed 31-day short-term rental.
Role: Former Berkshire agent, primary payment interceptor
Key Conduct: Signed for USPS-delivered certified check at BHHS office, concealed transfer of
funds from owner and tenant, sent final text admitting resignation and confirming receipt of funds. Took
Fifth Amendment when contacted by law enforcement.
Impact: Enabled creation of “nonpayment” narrative that contradicted bank and postal data.
Role: Real estate associate and lease originator
Key Conduct: Drafted, opened, and closed lease documents including a disputed forged renewal;
maintained multiple alias identities; lacked business license in Newport Beach; engaged in document deletion
patterns coinciding with fraud timeline. Handled communications contradicting court claims.
Impact: Central to document chain irregularities forming basis of fraud and perjury concerns.
Role: Eviction Attorney and Court-Facing Actor
Key Conduct: Continued UD filing despite receipt of certified evidence packets, USPS delivery
logs, and agent admission of payment. Threatened tenant with "public credit damage" unless $20,890 paid in
hallway of courthouse. Failed to disclose exculpatory records to judge.
Impact: Converted private fraud into court-sanctioned action; conduct aligns with CA B&P § 6103
violations and potential federal wire/mail fraud exposure.
Role: Defense Counsel Who Abandoned Case
Key Conduct: Withdrew days before trial, failed to file evidence packets, did not contact
witnesses, did not challenge forged documents, withheld client file contrary to Rule 1.16(e).
Impact: Deprived client of representation, enabling fraudulent judgment; conduct qualifies under
elder abuse (WIC § 15610.30) due to neglect of vulnerable client under medical supervision.
Predicate Acts — 12 Criminal Claims (Expanded)
Each predicate act below contains the statutory foundation, the factual event sequence, and the evidentiary artifacts supporting probable cause. This expanded section is designed for rapid assessment by prosecutors, investigators, or regulatory agencies.
1. Wire Fraud 18 U.S.C. § 1343
Digital messaging used to redirect payments to agent account; denial of payment despite timestamped Wells Fargo ledger; evidence routed electronically to counsel but ignored. Act constitutes use of interstate communications to further a scheme to obtain property by fraud.
2. Mail Fraud 18 U.S.C. § 1341
Certified USPS check delivered and signed for at BHHS office by agent, then concealed. False claim “never received” presented in court. Postal records serve as federal jurisdiction trigger and establish chain-of-custody breach.
3. Bank Fraud 18 U.S.C. § 1344
Check made out to both landlord and eviction attorney; misrepresented to court as “returned” without proof. Owner lacked legal authority to return check payable to corporation; no processing record exists. Attempt to obtain funds by deception meets statutory elements.
4. Forgery CA PC § 470
Lease term altered (12 months → 13 months) without consent; agent signature chain inconsistent; owner submitted version never countersigned by tenant. Disparity between original DocuSign record and printed version presented in court.
5. Extortion CA PC § 518
“Pay or be evicted” demand issued; threat to impact public credit history; $20,890 demand made in courthouse hallway. Coercive leverage applied to senior defendant with known medical vulnerability.
6. False Billing CA B&P § 17500
LY Construction invoice fabricated post-move-out; no entry logs, before/after photos, or scope-of-work details. Evidence suggests use as pretext for deposit retention and justifying retaliatory eviction.
7. Perjury CA PC § 118
Owner stated under oath that “no payment was made,” contradicting texts acknowledging delivery, bank records, and USPS logs. Statements satisfy knowing falsity and materiality tests for perjury prosecution.
8. Retaliatory Eviction CA Civ. Code § 1942.5
Eviction initiated after tenant reported fraud to law enforcement and DRE. Temporal sequence and communication logs confirm retaliatory intent.
9. Attorney Misconduct CA B&P § 6103
Silverstein filed fraud-laced UD knowing evidence contradicted claims. Declined to remedy falsehoods when presented with certified documents pre-hearing. Conduct meets statutory threshold for disbarment-level discipline.
10. Elder Abuse WIC § 15610.30
Tenant age 72, under cardiologist monitoring after stress-induced arrhythmia. Economic abuse and coercion of protected adults qualify as elder abuse under CA law.
11. Conspiracy
Owner, agent, attorney, and contractor operated with coordinated knowledge, shared objective, and mutual benefit. Evidence supports agreement to commit fraud via mutually reinforcing acts.
12. RICO Pattern 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Pattern satisfies: (1) enterprise (family-linked real estate cluster), (2) pattern (multiple acts over time), (3) racketeering activity (mail, wire, bank fraud), (4) conduct (eviction actions), (5) continuity (multi-year).
Expanded Timeline (Event-by-Event Legal Significance)
This timeline condenses three years of transactions, documents, admissions, and contradictory statements into a prosecutorial event map. Each entry includes the triggering event, the corresponding statute, and its immediate legal significance.
| Date | Event | Legal Significance |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 — 2023 | Undisclosed mold, electrical hazards, broken dishwasher, LY Construction patchwork. | Violations of H&S 17920.3 and 17920.10; fraudulent inducement (PC 532); elder-abuse risk due to unsafe conditions. |
| Apr 19, 2024 | E-deposit marked “New lease 24 – 1st payment.” Owner accepted it without objection. | Lease renewal authenticated; acceptance bars later claim of non-payment; proves PC 532 (false pretenses) when denied. |
| May 28–30, 2024 | Certified USPS check delivered to BHHS, signed by Hanson Le (“H”). | Federal mail fraud (18 USC 1341); receiving stolen property (PC 496); concealment of evidence (PC 135). |
| June 2024 | 3-Day Notice served listing only one legal tenant. | Forgery (PC 470); preparing false evidence (PC 134); invalid service used as leverage. |
| June 28, 2024 | Second payment ($5,350) extorted under threat of immediate eviction. | Extortion (PC 518); elder abuse (WIC 15610.30); proves financial coercion. |
| July 2024 | Mold and water intrusion confirmed by city inspector; no pet damage found. | Disproves landlord narrative; shows retaliatory motive (CC 1942.5). |
| Aug 2024 | Attorney Rosiak withdraws days before trial; fails to return client file. | B&P 6103 misconduct; PC 135 evidence suppression; WIC 15610.30 elder abuse via abandonment. |
| Jan 2025 | Property listed for $6,900 (25% over prior rent). | Price gouging during emergency (PC 396); shows motive for eviction. |
| Feb–Mar 2025 | All actors refuse evidence-return demand to HBPD Lt. Randall. | Coordinated PC 135 violations; obstruction (PC 166); pattern supporting RICO enterprise. |
Fraud Structure Map (Enterprise Pattern)
The coordinated behavior of the owner, agents, attorney, and affiliated construction entity forms a five-channel fraud architecture. This map is used by prosecutors to determine racketeering continuity.
1. Document Channel
False lease, forged renewal, altered service documents, suppression of DocuSign logs, contradictory versions submitted to court. Core predicate acts: forgery (PC 470), fictitious instruments (PC 476).
2. Money Channel
E-deposits accepted then denied, certified mail concealed, private-account routing, coerced “second payment,” 54% rental markup. Core predicate acts: PC 518, PC 487, 18 USC 1343, 18 USC 1344.
3. Access Channel
Unauthorized entries, drone activity, post-notice surveillance, agent withdrawal, “no pets” manipulation, LY Construction cover-ups. Core predicate acts: PC 602, H&S violations.
4. Court Channel
Counsel filed UD despite contradictory evidence; counsel threatened tenant in hallway; service defects used strategically; witness file suppressed. Core predicate acts: PC 132, PC 134, PC 166.
5. Corporate Channel
BHHS office received evidence; internal handling not logged; DRE notifications ignored; corporate counsel non-responsive. Core predicate acts: B&P § 17200, RICO 1962(c).
Evidence Highlights (For Investigators)
This section condenses the most prosecution-ready pieces of evidence, optimized for investigators reviewing the case under time pressure. Each bullet corresponds with a document already stored in the portal’s /time folder.
- USPS Proof: Certified check signed for at BHHS; contradicts “never received.”
- Text Admission: Owner texted “Hanson has the check” months before UD filing.
- Bank Verification: Wells Fargo logs confirm e-deposit and cashier’s check timelines.
- DocuSign Logs: Show agent-originated lease and renewal contradicting forged versions.
- Photo Evidence: 2022 mold-like substance and water intrusion predating tenancy.
- DRE Notice: Complaints filed prior to eviction, supporting retaliatory motive.
- Court Transcript: Counsel contradicted by his own client’s messages.
- UPS Delivery: Overnight packet delivered days before UD, ignored by counsel.
Federal Posture & Jurisdiction Overview
This matter qualifies for federal review under three primary channels:
- 18 U.S.C. § 1341 – Mail Fraud: Certified mail containing payment falsified in court.
- 18 U.S.C. § 1343 – Wire Fraud: Digital payment acknowledgments denied after transmission.
- 18 U.S.C. § 1962 – RICO: Multi-actor coordinated activity with financial motive.
Secondary channels include obstruction (18 U.S.C. § 1512), destruction of evidence (18 U.S.C. § 1519), and interstate financial crime statutes if bank routing patterns are documented.
District Attorney Action Grid (Immediate-Use)
This grid identifies the four highest-yield prosecutorial actions aligned with available evidence.
| Action | Basis | Expected Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Initiate Mail/Wire Fraud Case | USPS proof + text admission + concealment pattern | Federal jurisdiction established; triggers subpoena of BHHS office logs |
| Charge Retaliatory Eviction | Mold reports + police contact + temporal sequence | Immediate civil penalty; supports damages and restitution |
| File Elder Abuse Enhancement | Age 72 + cardiology monitoring + coercive threats | Increases sentencing exposure and case priority |
| Launch DRE Enforcement Inquiry | Agent license issues + forged renewal + alias patterns | Suspension or revocation; strengthens criminal case linkage |
Conclusion (Expanded)
The combined evidence set—financial records, chain-of-custody confirmations, sworn statements, and digital communication logs—demonstrates a complete collapse of the owner’s narrative and confirms a coordinated, multi-party fraud operation. This case now sits comfortably within the jurisdiction of both state and federal authorities. Remedies include civil, criminal, regulatory, and RICO-based actions.