A criminal complaint filed in Las Vegas Justice Court on September 8, 2026 alleges that Antonio Chavez and Claudia Guzman-Marquez bought gift cards and other goods using their own credit cards, then disputed the funding transactions as unauthorised. The accompanying sworn declaration traces purchases from May 25 through August 3. These are allegations in a filed case, rather than convictions. [1]
Purchase records separate card value from funding charges
The declaration identifies 26 cards with USD 500 face values at Town Square on May 25, split into sixteen funded through Discover and ten through American Express. It describes two further Fashion Island purchases in June: five USD 1,000 cards, then three USD 1,000 cards and one USD 500 card. The chart isolates the prepaid face values in those four purchases. [1]
Four mall gift-card purchases detailed in the declaration
Face value in four specifically documented mall gift-card purchases, excluding purchase fees.
USD
Tap or hover for details. All values are also available in the data table.
Source
Amounts described in a sworn investigative declaration, not judicial findings. This selected mall-purchase series excludes fees, other merchandise and a separately described Louis Vuitton gift card; it is not a complete loss total.
Show data tableHide data table
| Category | Gift-card face value |
|---|---|
| Town Square, May 25: Discover-funded | 8,000 USD |
| Town Square, May 25: Amex-funded | 5,000 USD |
| Fashion Island, June 19 | 5,000 USD |
| Fashion Island, June 20 | 3,500 USD |
The corresponding funding receipts were USD 8,032, USD 5,020, USD 5,019.75 and USD 3,515.80, including fees. They therefore differ from the balances available to spend. Investigators also describe a separate USD 1,625.63 Louis Vuitton gift card within a mixed merchandise purchase; it is outside this selected mall-card series, which must not be treated as the complete case inventory. [1]
For one American Express account, the declaration records a USD 6,287.01 reduction in the balance owed after two charges were reversed: the USD 5,020 mall purchase and a USD 1,267.01 Apple Store purchase. The latter was not the face value of another gift card. Keeping the instruments separate matters because a credit-card dispute reverses a funding claim, while the prepaid balance may already exist elsewhere. [1]
The investigator alleges that the disputes were false, citing receipts, merchant records, recordings and identification checks. That evidential account does not establish that all disputed charges became final bank losses. It also does not allege that the gift-card issuers or merchants knowingly joined the scheme. [1]
One card’s redemption trail shows the next stage
The declaration says InComm supplied records for the nine Fashion Island cards. One USD 1,000 card had two successful August 3 purchases: USD 878.90 at Diamond Garage and USD 121.10 at Aritzia. Both amounts are individually stated in the filing, rather than a balance inferred by subtracting one purchase from the card’s value. [1]
Two successful redemptions traced to one USD 1,000 gift card
Two August 3, 2026 purchases described in the declaration’s gift-card records and merchant receipt account.
USD
Tap or hover for details. All values are also available in the data table.
Source
One identified card, not all cards in the case. The earlier August 1 garage attempt was not authorised and is excluded. These are reported redemption transactions, not additional card issuance or a proven restitution amount.
Show data tableHide data table
| Category | Successful amount charged to the same gift card |
|---|---|
| Diamond Garage | 878.90 USD |
| Aritzia | 121.10 USD |
An earlier August 1 garage attempt required authorisation and was not completed; it is not counted again as a successful payment. The investigator says the Aritzia receipt, gift-card identifier and exterior surveillance linked the clothing purchase to the investigation. The filing’s review of one used card does not establish equivalent spending on every card or provide a complete recovery total. [1]
The complaint’s theft charge covers property valued at USD 25,000 or more but below USD 100,000, including gift cards, currency and merchandise. That charging bracket is not an exact gift-card-only loss. The filing also contains business-burglary, conspiracy and perjury counts, which remain subject to the criminal process. [1]
On September 9, LVMPD separately announced Chavez’s arrest and said his police powers would be suspended without pay pending further investigation. The department’s dated announcement establishes that administrative action at the time; it supplies no later conviction, sentence or final bank-loss reconciliation. [2]
In this article
Emma Carter
Emma Carter covers retail, e-commerce and the gift card shopping experience for Gift Card News.