Federal criminal charges against a former Roanoke Rapids car dealership executive during his tenure in Elizabeth City were dismissed earlier this month, court records show.

The charges against Jonathan Davenport were dismissed without prejudice, according to an order contained in the court records and filed by United States Attorney Thomas Walker.

The order says subsequent investigation in preparation for trial and preparing responses to pretrial motions revealed defects in the investigation and prosecution that warrant investigating the matter anew.

The order was filed on April 17.

The original criminal indictment against Davenport alleged that Alliance Nissan maintained a contractual relationship with Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation involving the purchase of new and used cars commonly called floor plan financing.

The floor plan financing was for vehicles waiting to be sold or traded by the dealership.

As part of the relationship, Alliance was required to submit and update the inventory that formed the collateral for money loaned to Alliance by NMAC.

Reports of the inventory status of vehicles financed by NMAC were transferred by wire, fax or other interstate computer systems at the direction of Davenport to advise NMAC of the collateral for NMAC floor plan loans to Alliance.

Substantial false and misleading information relating to vehicles under the floor plan loans was created and forwarded to NMAC by and at the direction of Davenport, the government alleged.

For example, court records said, vehicles were listed that were not being offered for sale by the dealership.

The indictment charged that Davenport diverted funds from Alliance for various authorized and unauthorized personal purposes including the purchase of real estate, boats, credit payments, rental expenses and personal cosmetic surgery payments for acquaintances and employees.

Davenport’s attorney, David Sutton, explained the matter in a defendant’s response.

In that response Sutton notes, “The evidence being offered by the government is confusing but similar.”

The response deals specifically with a floor plan audit that occurred in early 2009 after Davenport was no longer an employee or an owner at the Elizabeth City car dealership, which was the focus of the federal investigation. “None of the floor plan audits during any relevant period of time in the indictment were out of trust. So, it’s not evidence of any crime and it’s not similar to anything in the indictment.”

An early 2009 audit was a financial audit. “It is a due diligence audit,” Sutton said in the response, explaining later, “The financial audit is not criminal in nature nor is it anything similar to anything in the indictment. It can’t be … moreover financial audits are not similar to floor plan audits. It is simply the latest Hail Mary from the government in its quixotic attempt to find a victim who suffered a loss; or it represents misapprehension of the facts of the case.”

Lastly, wrote Sutton, “The government has never provided any discovery — a single check or bank transfer — to show any victim suffered any financial loss attributed to improper floor plan loans.”