A federal jury convicted 53-year-old Daniel Chartraw for running multiple fraudulent schemes that used sham crypto businesses, false investment guarantees, and personal deception, leaving investors nearly $1 million short and facing potential decades in prison.
A jury found Daniel Chartraw, formerly of South Lake Tahoe and Lodi, responsible for a series of connected frauds that ran from March 2021 through February 2022. Prosecutors say he and an associate controlled several companies, including Crypto‑Pal LLC and TDA Global LLC, which were presented to victims as legitimate investment and commercial ventures. The schemes promised active trading and guaranteed returns while masking how funds were handled.
Chartraw marketed Crypto‑Pal as a web-based cryptocurrency trading company that guaranteed high returns with no risk, while at times claiming TDA Global supplied jet fuel to airlines or ran its own crypto trading platform. He communicated with potential and existing investors through phone calls, text messages, email, and virtual meetings on platforms such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom. To hide his involvement he often used aliases, telling associates he needed to conceal his identity because of a prior fraud conviction.
Although Chartraw was not a signatory on the Crypto‑Pal business bank account, evidence showed he repeatedly accessed it to withdraw cash, make purchases, and transfer investor funds to accounts he personally controlled. Victims were shown fabricated account statements and given false assurances about growth, which built trust and encouraged further transfers. When investors raised concerns or tried to recover money, they encountered excuses, disappearing communication, or deflection of responsibility.
In some cases people were introduced to Chartraw through friends or family and convinced to send cryptocurrency or cash based on promises that their money would be actively traded. None of those funds was invested as represented, and investors received neither returns nor the return of their principal. The total loss to victims across the schemes was nearly $1 million.
“This verdict sends a clear message: individuals who exploit the trust of others and steal through deception will be held accountable,” said U.S. Attorney Eric Grant. The statement emphasized both the financial and emotional harm caused to victims and underscored that emerging technologies like cryptocurrency will not shield schemers from prosecution. The quote came as part of public remarks after the verdict was returned.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation led the investigation into the networks and transactions that underpinned the schemes, tracing transfers and account access linked to Chartraw. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jessica Delaney and J. Douglas Harman are handling the prosecution, following the evidence developed by agents and forensic accountants. Testimony at trial laid out how aliases such as “Leonard” or “Leon” were used while Chartraw controlled operations.
At trial, witnesses described how Chartraw cultivated familiarity through personal and professional relationships, then used manufactured documents and steady reassurance to keep money moving. Investors who pressed for transparency were given delays and explanations that investigators later showed were false. The pattern of behavior included withdrawals from accounts tied to the businesses and transfers into accounts under Chartraw’s control.
Chartraw is set for sentencing before Senior U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb on Sept. 28, 2026. He faces a maximum statutory penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each count, though the final sentence will depend on the court’s consideration of statutory factors and the federal Sentencing Guidelines. Those guidelines and any relevant aggravating or mitigating facts will shape the term and any restitution order.
The case highlights persistent risks around promised guarantees in the cryptocurrency space and the ways bad actors can exploit trust and technology to mask fraud. Investors and intermediaries alike were shown to be vulnerable when oversight and independent verification were absent, and prosecutors pointed to that vulnerability in building their case. The conviction closes the trial phase but leaves open the financial recovery questions for victims and the sentencing phase to determine the defendant’s punishment.
