Federal Wire Fraud Crimes In New York City
Call the Attorney at (212) 577-6677
The Federal Wire Fraud Statute is one of the most used tools in federal prosecutions of white collar and business crimes. Together with the Mail Fraud Statute, it is the work horse of federal prosecutors in white collar criminal cases.
The statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343 provides, "Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.''
The wire fraud statute is very similar to the mail fraud statute. Both are frequently used together in federal indictments. Elements of federal fraud and mail fraud crimes are identical. To convict, prosecution will have to show that the act was made in "furtherance" of or be ''closely related to'' the scheme to defraud. There is one substantial difference, however. To violate the statute, any mailing is sufficient, even within the same state. On the other hand, to violate the wire statute, the wire transmission needs to be between several states or countries.
To obtain conviction, the government must prove (1) the existence of a scheme to defraud, (2) use of wire communications in furtherance of the scheme, and (3) that the scheme was intended to deprive a victim of money or property."
The interpretation of the fraud statute is pretty liberal. The plan to defraud doesn't have to be specifically planned to obtain money or property. In fact, a charge of wire fraud can be found in a variety of circumstances. In one case, two debt collectors misrepresented themselves to the telephone company and post office in order to obtain confidential information regarding subscribers in violation of privacy laws. Both were convicted of wire fraud. In another case, a defendant opened a fake modeling" agency in order to meet and seduce young women, which landed him a wire fraud conviction. Also, the plan doesn't have to be successful to be in violate the fraud statute. Also, it doesn't matter if the defendant did not know that the victim on the other end of the telephone call was in another state.
"Wire communications" for the purposes of the fraud statute, may include computers, radio, television, telephone, telegraph and any other wire communication. In one case the issue was whether telephone calls transmitted by microwave signals are included in the statute. The defense believed that because the defendant's phone call was transmitted by microwave, it was not covered by the fraud statute. The court ruled otherwise.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Joseph Potashnik
Joseph Potashnik is a NYC Wire Fraud Lawyer. He represents people accused of state and federal offenses, including white-collar and fraud crimes, drugs and weapons crimes, and computer crimes. He also defends professionals such as physicians and teachers facing professional discipline.
Copyright Joseph Potashnik & Associates, PLLC
More information about Joseph Potashnik & Associates, PLLC
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
The wire fraud statute is very similar to the mail fraud statute. Both are frequently used together in federal indictments. Elements of federal fraud and mail fraud crimes are identical. To convict, prosecution will have to show that the act was made in "furtherance" of or be ''closely related to'' the scheme to defraud. There is one substantial difference, however. To violate the statute, any mailing is sufficient, even within the same state. On the other hand, to violate the wire statute, the wire transmission needs to be between several states or countries.
To obtain conviction, the government must prove (1) the existence of a scheme to defraud, (2) use of wire communications in furtherance of the scheme, and (3) that the scheme was intended to deprive a victim of money or property."
The interpretation of the fraud statute is pretty liberal. The plan to defraud doesn't have to be specifically planned to obtain money or property. In fact, a charge of wire fraud can be found in a variety of circumstances. In one case, two debt collectors misrepresented themselves to the telephone company and post office in order to obtain confidential information regarding subscribers in violation of privacy laws. Both were convicted of wire fraud. In another case, a defendant opened a fake modeling" agency in order to meet and seduce young women, which landed him a wire fraud conviction. Also, the plan doesn't have to be successful to be in violate the fraud statute. Also, it doesn't matter if the defendant did not know that the victim on the other end of the telephone call was in another state.
"Wire communications" for the purposes of the fraud statute, may include computers, radio, television, telephone, telegraph and any other wire communication. In one case the issue was whether telephone calls transmitted by microwave signals are included in the statute. The defense believed that because the defendant's phone call was transmitted by microwave, it was not covered by the fraud statute. The court ruled otherwise.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Joseph Potashnik
Joseph Potashnik is a NYC Wire Fraud Lawyer. He represents people accused of state and federal offenses, including white-collar and fraud crimes, drugs and weapons crimes, and computer crimes. He also defends professionals such as physicians and teachers facing professional discipline.
Copyright Joseph Potashnik & Associates, PLLC
More information about Joseph Potashnik & Associates, PLLC
View all articles published by Joseph Potashnik & Associates, PLLC
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
