Ex-Crop Bistro owner in court on fraud charges
CLEVELAND (WJW) – A local restaurateur who is accused of nearly $1 million in fraud appeared in court Thursday morning.
Marcelo Neves, 59, faces 15 counts related to fraud, tampering and passing bad checks.
Member of '90s girl group living in car for 3 years
The former owner of Crop Bistro in Ohio City was arrested on March 11 in Westlake after he was indicted by a grand jury.
Prosecutors said he applied for COVID relief funds, even though his business was closed.
4th teen identified in deadly Cleveland crash
According to prosecutors, Neves obtained $846,720 in Restaurant Revitalization funding to be used on Crop Bistro.Prosecutors said Neves used it for personal expenses, including the purchase of a restaurant in Olmsted Falls, and to pay off debts.
Neves is accused of writing bad checks, some to employees, totaling over $140,000, in addition to the $846,720.
Here's his full list of charges:
One second-degree felony count of aggravated theft
One second-degree felony count of telecommunications fraud
One third-degree felony count of tampering with records
Two fourth-degree felony counts of grand theft
Six fourth-degree felony counts of passing bad checks
Four fifth-degree felony counts of passing bad checks
Local city with most roundabouts earns national recognition
Prosecutors in court on Thursday morning argued Neves was a legitimate flight risk, because he has passports for multiple countries.
His bond was set at $50,000, and he was declared indigent.
He was appointed a public defender. Neves pretrial is set for March 19.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
ICE detains the most followed person on TikTok, Khaby Lame
(NewsNation) — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement reportedly detained the most-followed creator on TikTok on Friday. Khaby Lame, whose full name is Seringe Khabane Lame, is an Italian-Senegalese influencer. He was detained for immigration violations at the Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada, according to USA Today. Lame, 25, is a current citizen of Italy and reportedly 'overstayed the terms of his visa,' ICE reported. ICE allegedly gave Lame the option to depart the country voluntarily after he was detained, and Lame chose to leave the U.S. Lame became famous during the COVID-19 pandemic when he was laid off from his job in Italy. He uses the hashtag 'learnfromkhaby' on most of his videos, and he follows along as another creator talks about a complicated hack. Once he watches the 'hack,' he shows himself easily completing it, typically without saying anything. Lame is reportedly an ambassador for the men's clothing company Boss. He is also an ambassador for Binance and UNICEF. Lame moved from Senegal to Italy as a baby, but as The Associated Press reported, he didn't gain Italian citizenship until 2022. In 2024, he was named one of People's Creators of the Year. He told the publication at the time, 'Before TikTok, I was working in a factory. I had a lot of different jobs. I was helping support my family — three little brothers, one older brother and my parents. Then my world changed completely. It's a whole different life now.' Lame's detainment is one small part of President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. During his presidential campaign, he had promised to create mass deportations, which have led to ICE raiding workplaces, airports and more across the country.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
A Prosecutor Allegedly Tried To Jail Him for Fighting Civil Forfeiture. He May Finally Get His Day in Court.
A prosecutor who allegedly weaponized the criminal code to retaliate against a man for filing a class-action lawsuit that challenged the notorious civil forfeiture program in Wayne County, Michigan, is not entitled to prosecutorial immunity, a state appeals court ruled Monday, sending the man's lawsuit against that prosecutor back to the trial court. It is a significant legal victory when considering that such claims are often dead on arrival. Police seized Robert Reeves' Chevrolet Camaro and $2,000 in cash in 2019 on suspicion that he had stolen a skid steer from Home Depot. But as Reason's C.J. Ciaramella wrote in 2023, Reeves was not arrested or charged with a crime, and he was not able to actually challenge the seizure of his vehicle, as the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office (WCPO) declined to file a notice of intent to forfeit it. About seven months later, Reeves joined the class-action suit, filed by the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm, which alleged that Wayne County's civil forfeiture program violated the Constitution in multiple ways. Prosecutors responded expeditiously. First, the WCPO wrote the next day to a state police task force instructing it to release Reeves' car and his cash. Then, two weeks later, prosecutors filed felony charges against Reeves for allegedly receiving and concealing stolen property. Perhaps most notably, the government asked a judge to suspend his lawsuit while the criminal case against him proceeded, and Wayne County's Department of Corporation Counsel (DCC) used the charges as a defense against the suit. A judge would dismiss those charges for lack of evidence—in February 2021, over a year later, in part after delays brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Prosecutors were undeterred. They refiled the same charges shortly after that dismissal, only for them to again be dismissed for lack of evidence, this time in January 2022. Reeves then sued, alleging those criminal prosecutions violated his First and 14th Amendment rights as part of a concerted effort to derail his complaint against the county's civil forfeiture program—the practice that allows law enforcement to seize people's property even if they have not charged, much less convicted, the owner of a crime. "The pending charges caused Robert to be disqualified for expungement of prior offenses at a free expungement clinic, to spend time imprisoned in a COVID-infested jail, and to lose at least one job, when a police-officer client refused to allow [Reeves] to work as a contractor at his home specifically because of the pending charges," his complaint says. "Defendants' retaliatory prosecutions against [Reeves] were motivated by [Reeves'] participation in a federal class action lawsuit against Wayne County—protected activity under the First and Fourteenth Amendments." His complaint also notes that the "defendants worked together across departments—with the WCPO taking advice and direction from the DCC—in an irregular effort to pursue the criminal prosecutions." Suits like Reeves' are usually doomed before they begin, as prosecutors are protected by absolute immunity for judicial or quasi-judicial functions. In practice, that means victims have no recourse against district attorneys who may falsify evidence, introduce perjured testimony, coerce witnesses, or hide exculpatory information from the defense. But the State of Michigan Court of Appeals reversed a trial court decision and ruled yesterday that Dennis Doherty, the prosecutor who allegedly retaliated against Reeves by bringing felony charges, was not entitled to that protection, because the alleged misconduct did not qualify as quasi-judicial acts. "[Reeves] alleged that Doherty contacted the new officer in charge of the task force to seek clarification, recommended submission of the warrant request, and directed the officer in charge to file that request," the court wrote. "Those allegations suggest that Doherty's conduct was aimed at reviving a dormant prosecution and falls within the category of investigative or administrative acts, not quasi-judicial ones." For those acts, prosecutors are entitled to qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that permits civil suits against state and local government officials only if a plaintiff can prove it was already "clearly established" that the misconduct in question was unconstitutional. The trial court will now evaluate that question here. It's still a very high bar to meet. But in a commentary on how difficult it can be for victims of government abuse to find recourse, Reeves has a glimmer of hope after facing what are typically impossible odds. The post A Prosecutor Allegedly Tried To Jail Him for Fighting Civil Forfeiture. He May Finally Get His Day in Court. appeared first on
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
New York Judge Censured After Erupting During School Board Meeting, Demanding His Son Be Named Valedictorian
Long Beach City Court Judge Corey E. Klein was formally censured by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct The judge, who will maintain office through 2034, was accused of using his title amid a heated exchange during a school board meeting where he complained that his son was not named valedictorian Klein now has 30 days to appeal the decisionA New York judge was censured after erupting during a school board meeting. The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct confirmed via press release on Monday, June 9 that Long Beach City Court Judge Corey E. Klein had been censured for "invoking his judicial office in a personal matter involving his son." During a local school board meeting that streamed live on YouTube on April 11, 2024, Klein took the microphone after the session was opened up to the public for questions. He announced that he wanted "to discuss the implications of this board's policies as it relates to COVID and the selection of the valedictorian." The judge proceeded to say that his son was "not selected as a valedictorian because of this board's policies," adding that they "impact[ed] one person and one person only this year, my son." Klein said that his son was a straight-A student before he was cut off. "Don't try to out-lawyer me with the law," the judge said when the superintendent asked the school district attorney if this was the right place to have Klein's conversation, per a formal written complaint reviewed by the Commission on Judicial Conduct on Feb. 20, 2025. The judge's microphone was seemingly turned off as a member of the school board spoke. However, Klein could still be heard shouting in the background. 'If you are going to try to be a lawyer, then refer to me by my title as well, okay. Thank you," Klein said. 'You can refer to me, counsel, as judge,' he also said, according to the complaint, which also noted that Klein frequently used the terms "counsel" and "counselor" to address the attorney. At one point, Klein accused the board of "[trying] to sick your pit bull attorney on me." He also said, "I'm sorry that your attorney needed to go at me when all I wanted to do was come up here and politely address one simple question." He had the floor for nearly 20 minutes. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Amid his outburst, he was told that he "had the right to appeal" the decision about his son. However, this was not the place to do so. "Don't try to shut me down," Klein said, threatening to continue speaking "all night." At one point, the attorney noted that he was "respecting" Klein and asked for the same respect in return. He also addressed Klein's repeated use of legal terminology, saying, "Your Honor, we are not in court at this point." In the commission's press release, it was noted that Klein "agreed to the censure." The release also noted that all 11 members "concurred" with the determination that was made on May 29, 2025. He was also censured for using his office to help an "acquaintance" get out of a "traffic matter." Now that the determination has been filed, Klein has 30 days to make a formal appeal. According to the New York State Commission, the judge has held office at the Long Beach City Court since 2015. He will remain a judge until the end of 2034. 'It corrodes public confidence in the judiciary when a judge lends the prestige of judicial office to advance a private benefit," Commission Administrator Robert H. Tembeckjian said, per the release. Tembeckjian continued, by adding, "Doing so impulsively, in an unseemly public argument over who should be a high school's honoree, or as a favor to a parking ticket scofflaw, is especially irresponsible." According to the Center for Judicial Ethics of the National Center for State Courts, a censure "is a formal sanction for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct." While a judge who is censured "does not require suspension or removal," the formal matter is a "stern rebuke." PEOPLE reached out to the New York State Unified Court System for comment but did not hear back at the time of publication. Read the original article on People
