Why Was The Former Deputy Sentenced?
Former Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department deputy Scott Allen Simpkins was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison and fined $10,000 for obstructing a federal investigation involving cryptocurrency businessman Adam Iza.
U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson handed down the sentence after Simpkins admitted lying to federal investigators about a 2021 incident in which Iza allegedly threatened a victim into transferring $25,000. Simpkins pleaded guilty on March 17 to one count of obstruction of justice and resigned from the LASD’s Special Enforcement Bureau following his felony plea.
The case places another law enforcement figure inside the wider criminal proceedings surrounding Iza, who has faced multiple federal cases tied to violence, fraud, tax offenses, and alleged crypto-related extortion. For investigators, Simpkins’ conduct was not a side issue. His false statements affected a federal inquiry into whether a victim was threatened during a forced transfer of funds.
The sentencing also highlights a recurring risk around private security work involving current or former law enforcement officers. When deputies or ex-deputies work for wealthy clients outside official channels, the boundary between security services, influence, and intimidation can become legally exposed.
What Happened At Iza’s Bel Air Residence?
According to prosecutors, Simpkins was working private security at Iza’s Bel Air residence in 2021 alongside fellow former LASD deputy Christopher Michael Cadman. Both men were employed by Saavedra & Associates, a company owned by then-LASD Deputy Eric Chase Saavedra.
Prosecutors said Iza placed four or five live 9mm rounds on his desk, twirled a bullet while threatening the victim, and demanded a $25,000 transfer. After the alleged threat, Simpkins and Cadman escorted the victim from the property.
Simpkins later lied to federal investigators about what he had witnessed. That false account formed the basis of the obstruction charge. The government’s case focused not only on the alleged threat by Iza, but also on the role of private security personnel who were present during the incident and later gave statements to federal authorities.
Simpkins and Cadman were paid $1,400 each for their shifts during the incident. After the pair helped secure a long-term security contract with Iza, Saavedra & Associates paid them about 10% of the firm’s total profits from the contract’s first month, according to prosecutors.
Investor Takeaway
The case shows how crypto wealth can create legal exposure beyond market conduct. Private security arrangements, alleged intimidation, and false statements to investigators can become part of broader federal scrutiny around crypto-linked criminal cases.
How Does This Connect To Adam Iza’s Federal Cases?
The sentencing comes as Iza remains in federal custody. He has been held since September 2024 and pleaded guilty in California in January 2025 to conspiracy against rights, wire fraud, and tax evasion. He has not yet been sentenced in that case.
The California case is separate from another federal proceeding in Connecticut. Last month, the Department of Justice said Iza pleaded guilty in Connecticut federal court to conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.
That case stemmed from an August 2024 attempted bitcoin robbery and kidnapping in Danbury, Connecticut. Prosecutors said the plot targeted the parents of an individual accused of stealing hundreds of millions of dollars in bitcoin.
Taken together, the cases show how federal authorities are treating crypto-linked crime as a wider criminal network issue rather than a narrow digital asset matter. The charges involve alleged coercion, robbery, kidnapping, wire fraud, tax evasion, and abuse of law enforcement connections.
Why Does The Case Matter Beyond One Sentencing?
Simpkins’ 18-month sentence is significant because it reinforces that obstruction charges can reach people who are not accused of carrying out the underlying crypto-related conduct. The legal risk extends to anyone who misleads investigators, helps shield suspects, or uses law enforcement credibility in private arrangements tied to alleged criminal activity.
For the crypto industry, the case adds to the reputational burden around figures who present themselves as wealthy digital asset entrepreneurs while facing allegations involving coercion or fraud. These cases do not reflect ordinary market activity, but they shape how prosecutors, regulators, and the public view the risks surrounding crypto wealth and private power.
For law enforcement agencies, the case raises governance questions around outside employment, private security contracts, and former deputies working for high-risk clients. The involvement of multiple current or former LASD-linked figures makes the matter more than an individual obstruction case.
The sentencing does not close the broader Iza proceedings. His pending sentencing in California and separate Connecticut case will determine the larger criminal exposure. But Simpkins’ prison term shows that federal prosecutors are also pursuing those who allegedly helped obstruct the investigations around him.
