Home
>> Federal Defense
>> Bank Fraud
MIAMI AND FORT
LAUDERDALE BANK FRAUD ATTORNEY
Attorney
Representation in Miami, Florida Since 1984
Today's
statutory bank fraud provision was made up to provide
an effective vehicle for the prosecution of frauds
in which the victims are financial institutions --
federally created, controlled, or insured. This law
was made under the protection of the Comprehensive
Crime Control Act, which was enacted in 1984.
The objective
of bank fraud is to accomplish a desired result
by deception, trickery, concealment, and/or dishonesty,
like other forms of white collar fraud. With bank
fraud, however, the intent or scheme must be to
defraud a financial institution federally insured
by the United States government.
In order
to successfully prosecute a defendant for bank fraud,
an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) must
present evidence that when submitted to a jury or
judge would prove beyond a reasonable doubt:
- Such
said defendant knowingly completed, or attempted
to complete, a scheme or plan by means of false
or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
- Such
said defendant acted with the specific intent
to defraud;
- Such
said false pretenses, representations or promises
that the defendant made were material;
- Such
said defendant placed the financial institution
at risk for civil liability or financial loss;
and
- Such
said financial institution was insured by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or an equivalent
agency as defined by Title 18 U.S.C § 20.
How have
the courts defined bank fraud violations?
A. An accountant's plan where he defrauded his employers
by diverting money from their business bank account
into his own violated 18 U.S.C. § 1344, when
he deliberately engaged in a pattern of behavior
that was designed to mislead the bank because he
was acting within the scope of his authority, since
the bank was the victim, losing control and custody
over its account holder's money and being exposed
to real threat of civil liability. United States
v. Morgenstern, 933 F.2d 1108 (2d Cir. 1991).
B. An indictment alleging sale of stolen checks
was sufficient to allege scheme intended to victimize
a bank in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344, since
inherent in the sale of stolen checks is knowledge
that they will eventually be presented for payment
to the bank which maintains that account, thereby
exposing the bank to real loss. United States v.
Stavroulakis, 952 F.2d 686 (2d Cir. 1992).
C. Under the bank fraud law, it is not necessary
for the government to demonstrate that the defendant
personally benefited from his scheme to defraud
a financial institution. United States v. Knipp,
963 F.2d 839 (6th Cir. 1992).
Potential
Punishment:
A person may be found guilty of a felony, put in
prison up to 30 years, and fined up to $1,000,000.
The punishment is per transaction. For example,
if one false loan document is delivered in person,
one fraudulent financial statement is submitted
by mail and three fraudulent representations are
made by telephone, the potential punishment above
is multiplied by 5.
Often
times, the States’s Assistant U.S. Attorney
(AUSA) will secure a Federal Indictment from a Federal
Grand Jury and charge a defendant not only with
bank fraud, but also with securities fraud, wire
fraud, mail fraud, money laundering, RICO crimes,
and conspiracy to commit the aforementioned crimes.
One should also be aware that since 1987 parole
has been abolished in the Federal System. Expungement
(removal of conviction from public records) is also
not available.
|
Previous