§

18 U.S.C. § 1029

Section 1029 - Fraud and related activity in connection with access devices
Section 1029 - Fraud and related activity in connection with access devices

7 Analyses of this statute by attorneys

  1. Cryptocurrency 101 – DOJ’s New Cryptocurrency Enforcement Framework Provides Guidance And Promises Of Heightened Scrutiny Of Virtual Assets Through Intergovernmental Collaboration

    Vinson & Elkins LLPEphraim (Fry) WernickOctober 22, 2020

    Report at 16.[2] The Report references several statutes, including: 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Wire Fraud); 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (Mail Fraud); 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j and 78ff (Securities Fraud); 18 U.S.C. § 1029 (Access Device Fraud); 18 U.S.C. § 1028 (Identity Theft and Fraud); 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (Fraud and Intrusions in Connection with Computers); 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. (Illegal Sale and Possession of Firearms); 18 U.S.C. § 2320 (Possession and Distribution of Counterfeit Items); 18 U.S.C. § 2251 et seq. (Child Exploitation Activities); 21 U.S.C. § 841 et seq. (Possession and Distribution of Controlled Substances); 18 U.S.C. § 1956 et seq. (Money Laundering); 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (Transactions Involving Proceeds of Illegal Activity); 18 U.S.C. § 1960 (Operation of an Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business); 31 U.S.C. § 5331 et seq. (Failure to Comply with Bank Secrecy Act Requirements); 18 U.S.C. § 982 and 21 U.S.C. § 853 (Criminal Forfeiture); and 18 U.S.C. § 981 (Civil Forfeiture).[3] Report at 26.[4]Id.

  2. Recognizing Access to the Internet as a “Basic Need,” Rejecting Blanket Bans on Internet Use, and Raising Questions as to the Scope of Monitoring Personal Computers

    Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer P.A.Eric MarcyApril 4, 2017

    den. 562 U.S. 1223 (2011);United States v. Andrus, 483 F3d 711, 718 (10th Cir. 2007);United States v. Pruden, 398 F3d 241, 248-250 (3rd Cir. 2005);United States v. Lifshitz, 369 F3d 173, 190 (2d Cir. 2004);Trulock v. Freeh, 275 F3d 391, 403, 404 (4th Cir. 2001);United States v. Voelker, 489 F3d 139, 151 (3rd Cir. 2007);United States v. Loy, 237 F3d 251, 265-267 (3rd Cir. 2001);Note, Recent Case: Criminal Law - Supervised Release - Third Circuit Approves Decade-Long Internet Ban for Sex Offender, 123 Harv. L. Rev. 776, 779 (2010);Laura Tatelman, Note, Give Me Internet or Give Me Death: Analyzing the Constitutionality of Internet Restrictions as a Condition of Supervised Release for Child Pornography Offenders, 20 Cardozo J.L. & Gender 431, 442 (2014);Lori McPherson, The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) at 10 Years: History, Implementation, and the Future, 64 Drake L. Rev. 741, 789 (2016);18 U.S.C. § 1029; 18 U.S.C. §1030;18 U.S.C § 2241, et. seq.; 18 U.S.C. §2251, et.

  3. The Supreme Court’s Broad Interpretation of the Bank Fraud Statute May Provide a Potent Tool in Combatting Cybercrime

    Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLPJoseph MorenoDecember 20, 2016

    More commonly, computer hackers located anywhere in the world can deploy malware that steals information such as account numbers and online bank login credentials from the computer networks of account holders, banks, or third parties.See 18 U.S.C. §§1341 & 1343 See 18 U.S.C. §§2311, 2314-2315.See 18 U.S.C. §§1029.

  4. The Limits to Ordering Computer Monitoring as a Special Condition of Supervised Release in the Federal Court System

    Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer P.A.Eric MarcyOctober 29, 2015

    den. 562 U.S. 1223 (2011);United States v. Andrus, 483 3d 711, 718 (10th Cir. 2007);United States v. Pruden, 398 3d 241, 248-250 (3rd Cir. 2005);United States v. Lifshitz, 369 3d 173, 190 (2d Cir. 2004);Trulock v. Freeh, 275 3d 391, 403, 404 (4th Cir. 2001);United States v. Voelker, 489 3d 139, 151 (3rd Cir. 2007)United States v. Loy, 237 3d 251, 265-267 (3rd Cir. 2001); Note, Recent Case: Criminal Law – Supervised Release – Third Circuit Approves Decade-Long Internet Ban for Sex Offender, 123 Harv. L. Rev. 776, 779 (2010); 18 U.S.C. § 1029; 18 U.S.C. §1030; 18 U.S.C § 2241, et. seq.; 18 U.S.C. §2251, et.

  5. Identity Theft

    Garland, Samuel & Loeb, P.C.Don SamuelSeptember 1, 2015

    The defendants opened a bank account in the corporate name and cashed checks stolen from the corporation.United States v. Onyesoh, 674 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2012)The government must establish that an expired credit card can be used in order to enhance a sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1029. Absent proof of “usability,” the card is not capable of obtaining something of value, which is an element of the offense.

  6. Telecommunications, Altering Equipment

    Garland, Samuel & Loeb, P.C.Don SamuelSeptember 1, 2015

    United States v. Harrell, 530 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2008)In the context of deciding what amounts to contraband (and thus not available to be returned to a claimant pursuant to Rule 41(g)), the Ninth Circuit canvasses the various applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(7), which makes it a crime to knowingly and with intent to defraud, produce, traffic in, or possess a telecommunications instrument that has been modified or altered to obtain unauthorized use of telecommunications services. Various devices possessed by the defendant in this case did not qualify as altered devices under the scope of the statute.

  7. Case Summaries and Commentary by Federal Defenders of the Tenth Circuit

    Federal Public Defender Office, District of New MexicoShari AllisonJune 6, 2011

    He goes on to opine that the defendant was a "confirmed grifter" who received a sentence that was perhaps less, but certainly not more, than she deserved. U.S. v. Heath, 2011 WL 2023425 (5/25/11) (Okl.) (unpub'd) - "Access devices" under 18 U.S.C. § 1029(e)(1) includes credit card account numbers alone. Richwine v. Romero, 2011 WL 2066552 (5/26/11) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - A habeas procedural win.