Under Texas law, a school official who accepts secret payments in exchange for steering public money to a favored vendor commits bribery, one of the most serious integrity offenses in the Penal Code, and the person paying those kickbacks faces the same charge. That principle frames a striking case out of Ohio, where a former community-school superintendent and a Phoenix business partner were indicted in an alleged $8 million kickback scheme that federal prosecutors say funneled public education dollars into luxury cars and vacation rentals.
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Ohio, a federal grand jury returned an eight-count indictment against Leondo Ramone Davenport, 50, of Cincinnati, the former superintendent and operator of Dohn Community High School, and Jonathan Larry Ballew, 62, of Phoenix. Each is charged with wire fraud, punishable by up to 20 years, and engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from unlawful activity, punishable by up to 10 years. U.S. Attorney Dominick S. Gerace II said the office is “putting an end to fraudsters exploiting public trust and profiting off of the American taxpayer.” While this case is federal, the alleged conduct maps directly onto several Texas statutes, and L & L Law Group, PLLC explains how a defendant in Frisco or the wider DFW area would face these allegations. An indictment is only an accusation, and both men are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
What Was the Ohio School Kickback Scheme?
The alleged scheme was a classic pay-to-play arrangement between an insider and a vendor. Prosecutors say that from 2021 to 2024, Ballew incorporated at least four entities that purported to provide the school with educational services, training, technology, staffing, and construction, then submitted false and fraudulent invoices through those entities. Davenport, who controlled the school’s spending, allegedly authorized payments of more than $8 million and received more than $4 million back in kickbacks. Charging documents say the money funded luxury cars, rental properties, and a $30,000-per-month Miami-area vacation rental leased in October 2023.
How Would Texas Treat Kickbacks to a School Official?
In Texas, a public school official who takes payments to influence how public funds are spent can be charged with bribery under Section 36.02 of the Penal Code. That statute makes it a second-degree felony to solicit, accept, or offer any benefit as consideration for a public servant’s decision, opinion, or exercise of discretion. Critically, the law reaches both sides of the deal: the person paying the benefit and the official receiving it are equally exposed, so a vendor and an administrator can each face the same charge. Because a community or charter school administrator handling public money can qualify as a public servant, the kickback arrangement itself is the crime, regardless of whether the invoiced work was partly performed.
What Other Texas Charges Could Apply?
Beyond bribery, a Texas prosecutor would likely stack several property offenses. Misapplication of fiduciary property under Section 32.45 targets a person entrusted with funds, such as a superintendent controlling a school budget, who deals with that money in a way that creates a substantial risk of loss. Theft by deception under Section 31.03, combined with the aggregation rule in Section 31.09, would let the state fold dozens of false-invoice payments across several years into a single high-value felony. If the proceeds were then run through purchases like vehicles and property leases, Section 34.02 money laundering could apply to the movement of the illicit funds.
What Penalties Would a Frisco Defendant Face?
The exposure in a Texas courtroom would be significant. Bribery under Section 36.02 is a second-degree felony carrying two to 20 years in prison and a fine up to $10,000. Aggregated theft or misapplication of fiduciary property involving $300,000 or more is a first-degree felony, punishable by five to 99 years or life. A defendant in the Frisco area, in Collin County, could see bribery, theft, and money-laundering counts charged together, with restitution to the public entity a central issue. Texas courts treat the abuse of a public or fiduciary position, and the total dollar loss, as aggravating factors at sentencing.
What Defenses Might Apply in a Texas Case?
A strong defense starts with intent and the nature of the payments, because bribery requires proof that a benefit was given or taken as consideration for an official act, not merely that money changed hands between business associates. Defense counsel would examine whether the invoiced services were genuinely provided, whether the payments reflected legitimate contracts rather than a corrupt agreement, and whether the alleged kickbacks can be traced with the certainty the state must show. Challenges to the loss calculation, the reliability of financial records, and the characterization of ordinary business dealings as criminal can all narrow exposure or support a negotiated resolution.
How L&L Law Group Can Help
Public-corruption and financial-fraud cases involve enormous volumes of records, overlapping state and federal exposure, and complex questions about intent, which makes early legal guidance essential. L & L Law Group, PLLC represents clients across Frisco and the DFW area in bribery, theft, fiduciary, and white-collar matters, working to test the strength of the state’s intent evidence, challenge inflated loss figures, and protect a client’s rights at every stage. If you or someone you know is facing an investigation or charges involving public funds, kickbacks, or financial fraud, contact L & L Law Group, PLLC to discuss your options.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a kickback to a school official a crime in Texas? Yes. Under Section 36.02, offering or accepting a benefit as consideration for a public servant’s decision is bribery, a second-degree felony, and both the person paying and the official receiving the kickback can be charged.
Can a vendor be charged along with the official? Yes. The bribery statute reaches both sides of the transaction, so a contractor who pays kickbacks faces the same charge as the administrator who accepts them.
Can many false invoices be combined into one charge? Yes. Under Section 31.09, amounts obtained through a continuing scheme can be aggregated, which can elevate a series of payments to a single first-degree felony when the total is large.
Reporting this commentary is based on:
The Arizona Republic — $8M school fraud funded Phoenix man’s luxury lifestyle, feds say
Talk to a real attorney
Send a few details and a defense attorney will reach back within an hour, day or night. No call center. No paralegal screen.