Mail and Wire Fraud
Like any other type of fraud, mail and wire fraud are federal crimes. United States Code: Title 18, 1341 makes it a crime for anybody to use the U.S. mail to defraud another person. Two requirements are necessary for someone to be found guilty of this offense:
- The person must have knowingly and willfully devised a scheme to defraud
- The person used the U.S. postal service to accomplish this scheme
Wire fraud is defined by U.S. Code: Title 18, 1343 as a crime if someone devises or intends to devise a scheme or trick to defraud another person to obtain money or property using wire, radio, the Internet or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce. Fax machines and computers (sending emails) are included under this statute as wire fraud communication devices.
Experienced Mail and Wire Fraud Attorney
Attorney David M. Dudley has a wealth of experience in successfully defending clients against charges of mail and wire fraud. As an example, one of his clients, a lawyer, was indicted for mail and wire fraud after he filed an insurance claim, requesting he be reimbursed for his yacht, which had been destroyed by pirates in the Mediterranean Sea. A jury found him guilty.
When it came time for the client to be sentenced, he hired Mr. Dudley. After a series of legal actions by both Mr. Dudley and the Court, a court of appeals reversed a sentence filed against the defendant. He was then resentenced to serve a greatly reduced prison term than was originally set.
If you are facing mail and wire fraud charges, it is important that you hire an experienced and skilled mail and wire fraud attorney. Mr. Dudley has handled numerous cases involving fraud and has successfully helped to minimize many people's sentences. To schedule a consultation, contact Mr. Dudley today.
Selected Case Results: Mail and Wire Fraud
- U.S. v. R.D.: An attorney was indicted for mail and wire fraud in federal court after filing an insurance claim for his yacht which he claimed had been destroyed by pirates in the Mediterranean Sea. Convicted at trial, the defendant hired Mr. Dudley for sentencing. At the sentencing hearing, Attorney Dudley persuaded the court to impose a prison term significantly less than that which both the government and the PSR had recommended. In the process, however, the court rejected the defense contention that a two-point upward guideline adjustment did not apply. The court of appeals later agreed with that argument and REVERSED the defendant's sentence. A subsequent resentencing resulted in the defendant's prison term being reduced.
- U.S. v. R.Y.: While directing a telemarketing operation, the defendant sold worthless art to consumers under false pretenses. According to the federal government, which indicted him for mail and wire fraud, the defendant's conduct cost his victims over $7,000,000. After negotiating a plea agreement which held him accountable for several million dollars less than that, the defense persuaded the district court to impose a sentence of 60 months, a term far lower than that which he was originally facing.