The SEC has charged South Florida resident Michael D. Williams and his company, CMI Capital, LLC, with running an alleged investment scheme that raised approximately $860,000 from at least 18 investors. Many of those investors are current or retired law enforcement officers in South Florida.
In a litigation release issued September 23, 2026, the regulator said Williams allegedly misappropriated approximately $384,000 of investor and client funds to cover personal expenses, including credit card balances, a sports car, and vacations.
What happened in the CMI Capital case
The SEC filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida under Litigation Release No. 26646. The complaint names Williams and CMI Capital, a firm that also does business as Check Mate Investments.
The charges include the antifraud and registration provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, the antifraud provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Williams has not yet settled the matter, and the allegations remain subject to court review.
Key facts in the SEC’s case
The alleged scheme drew roughly $860,000 from a tight-knit professional community. The table below summarizes the core figures the SEC released.
| Case detail | Figure |
|---|---|
| Funds raised | Approximately $860,000 |
| Investors involved | At least 18 |
| Alleged misappropriation | Approximately $384,000 |
| Investor group | Current and retired law enforcement officers |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida |
| SEC release | Litigation Release No. 26646, September 23, 2026 |
How the alleged scheme worked
Williams allegedly solicited money for CMI Capital, doing business as Check Mate Investments, without registering the offering. The SEC’s registration charges indicate the investment was never cleared for sale to the public through any registered pathway.
Rather than deploying the funds as promised, Williams allegedly diverted about $384,000 for personal spending. The SEC says those payments covered credit card balances, a sports car, and vacations.
The remaining investor money carried its own risks under the federal antifraud allegations in the complaint. At 18 or more investors contributing roughly $860,000, the average placement approached $48,000 per person.
Red flags investors can learn from
The case follows a familiar pattern. An unregistered investment pitched inside a trusted circle, with personal spending funded straight from investor accounts.
- Unregistered offering. The SEC’s registration charges show the investment was never cleared for public sale.
- Affinity angle. Pitching law enforcement colleagues built trust the product itself never earned.
- Personal spending. About $384,000 allegedly went to credit cards, a sports car, and vacations rather than any stated investment purpose.
- Concentrated pool. Fewer than two dozen investors supplied nearly a million dollars, leaving each account exposed to the same failure.
Why this case matters beyond South Florida
Affinity fraud cases share a common thread: the pitch arrives through someone you know. Trust shortens the questions investors ask, and unregistered offerings leave them without the protections that registered securities provide.
That combination keeps affinity schemes a recurring feature of the SEC’s enforcement docket. The lesson applies to any investment introduced through a lodge, a union hall, or a department locker room.
What affected investors can do now
Investors who placed money with Michael D. Williams or CMI Capital should gather their records now. Account statements, wire confirmations, and any solicitation materials will anchor a recovery claim.
The SEC’s case is civil, so remedies such as disgorgement and penalties may follow a court ruling. Victims can also pursue separate arbitration or direct claims depending on how they were solicited.
Time limits apply to every path. Florida investors should act promptly rather than waiting for the SEC case to conclude.
Frequently asked questions about the CMI Capital case
Was CMI Capital a registered investment?
No. The SEC complaint includes registration charges under the Securities Act of 1933, meaning the offering was never cleared for public sale. That removes standard investor protections.
How can affected investors pursue recovery?
Recovery paths include the SEC court process, separate civil claims, and arbitration if the solicitation ran through a registered account. Each path carries its own deadline.
What records should investors gather first?
Account statements, wire confirmations, and any solicitation materials anchor a claim. Investors who acted on a colleague’s referral should note who introduced the investment.
Haselkorn & Thibaut fights for investor recovery
Haselkorn & Thibaut is a securities law firm founded by former Wall Street defense attorneys who shifted their practice to represent investors. The firm has recovered over $520 million for clients in securities matters and maintains a 98 percent success rate in resolved nontraded REIT cases. Attorneys are AV Preeminent rated through Martindale-Hubbell, designated as Super Lawyers, and hold a 5.0-star client review average. The firm operates on a contingency basis — no recovery, no fee.
Contact Haselkorn & Thibaut today
Time matters in investment fraud cases. The earlier you act, the stronger your position. The firm offers a free case evaluation to assess your losses, review your account history, and explain your options under arbitration or settlement.
- Main Phone: 1-888-885-7162
- website for a free consultation
Offices in Florida, New York, Arizona, Texas, and North Carolina. Former Wall Street defense attorneys with 95+ years of combined experience. No recovery, no fee.
