Georgia Man Sentenced in Multi-State Senior Fraud Scheme
Patrick Dallas was sentenced to 24 months in federal prison for his role in a multi-state sweepstakes scam that defrauded senior citizens out of at least $1 million, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Rhode Island.
By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 14, 2026, 7:00 p.m. ETWritten Aug 20, 2026, 9:30 a.m. ET
On August 12, 2026, 38-year-old Patrick Dallas of Georgia was in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island to 24 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release, according to official records released by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Rhode Island. U.S. District Court Judge Melissa R. DuBose also ordered Dallas to pay restitution after he was convicted of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering.
According to court records, Dallas and two co-conspirators ran a fraudulent Publishers Clearing House and lottery sweepstakes scheme that defrauded senior citizens in Rhode Island and several other states out of at least $1 million. Victims were falsely informed they had won large cash prizes and were directed to pay upfront fees, taxes, and personal identifying information to collect their winnings. Victims were also instructed to send cash, gift cards, and luxury items, including Rolex watches and iPhones, to addresses controlled by the defendants.
Charles C. Calenda, the First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Rhode Island, commented on the case, stating, "These defendants preyed on seniors across the country by offering them the false promise of life‑changing winnings, only to drain their savings and exploit their trust. This office remains committed to aggressively prosecuting individuals who target vulnerable victims, and today’s sentence reflects our determination to hold accountable those who profit from fraud and deceit."
Jeffrey Grimming, Acting Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Investigations New England, stated that Dallas and his co-conspirators ran a predatory scheme that "stole from seniors by weaponizing hope, trust, and fear, convincing victims they had won life-changing prizes only to drain them of their hard-earned money and personal information."
Dallas's sentencing follows the sentencing of co-defendant Owen Demoy Byfield, 33, who was by Judge DuBose to 24 months in prison, ordered to pay $1.7 million in restitution, and received a judicial order of removal allowing for deportation after serving his sentence. Assistant U.S. Attorney John P. McAdams prosecuted the case, which was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and the Warwick Police Department, with assistance from several state and local law enforcement agencies.
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.