United States v. Bala, 489 F.3d 334 (8th Cir. 2007)In order to prove a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1955, the government must prove that the defendant violated a state gambling criminal law. Proving that the defendant violated a state administrative regulation is not sufficient.

The district court denied the motion. A few days later, the defendant entered into an agreement by which he pled guilty to a different federal felony, operating an illegal gambling business in violation of 18 USC § 1955, and the government dismissed the original indictment. On appeal, the defendant renewed his jurisdictional challenge to the original indictment.

wn professional athletes in the NBA and on the PGA Tour also have been rumored to have gambling issues and even secret suspensions from play. NBA referee Tim Donaghy was caught and sentenced to fifteen months in federal prison for his role in fixing NBA games in the 1990s and early 2000s.Indeed, despite the Murphy decision, many aspects of sports gambling are still illegal with the common theme of preventing unwelcome intrusions by interstate or international gambling businesses into states that otherwise prohibit gambling. For example, under the Wire Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1084, conducting a gambling business that makes use of interstate wire communication facilities to place wagers across state lines or to assist in placing such wagers is a federal crime, unless such betting is legal in both the state where the bet originated and the state where the bet was placed. See United States v. Cohen, 260 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2001).Other federal gambling laws include the Illegal Gambling Business Act, 18 U.S.C. §1955 (prohibiting interstate gambling businesses that are unlawful in the state where conducted) and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 5361-67 (expressly addressing Internet-based gambling by outlawing accepting payments related to Internet gambling that is illegal in the place where the wager is placed, received or transmitted). The U.S. Department of Justice also prosecutes gambling under the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. §1952, when interstate commerce is used to conduct an illegal gambling business, under the RICO laws, 18 U.S.C. §1962, when there is a pattern of unlawful gambling offenses or collection of unlawful gambling debts, and under the money laundering statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956 and 1957.Athletes, coaches, staff, and league officials may be tempted to be sanguine about gambling, thinking its “mostly legal,” everyone is doing it, and no one in my organization is going to “fix” games. But as the Alabama baseball situation demonstrates, even a simple phone cal

It would not be the first time that courts allow statutes without a private right of action to serve as the “unlawful” predicate acts for claims under the UCL. For example, courts have allowed alleged violations of the Illegal Gambling Business Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1955, and California Penal Code § 330b, neither of which provide for private enforcement, to serve as bases for actionable claims under the UCL. Already, one class action has been filed in New York federal court under the UCL’s “unlawful” prong using the B.O.T. Act as the requisite predicate act. Plaintiffs claimed that defendant Noom’s trial cancellation process, which is allegedly designed to prevent cancellation and enable automatic renewal, requires consumers to find and communicate with undisclosed bots, a practice that falls squarely within the B.O.T. Act’s prohibition, and therefore constitutes a violation of the UCL.

[6]See 31 U.S.C. § 5362(1)(E)(ix) for the statutory language carving out the UIGEA fantasy sports exception.[7] DFS sites potentially violate the federal Wire Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1084.Additionally, a violation of state gaming law can trigger a violation of the federal Illegal Gambling Business Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1955. In fact, the US Attorney for the SDNY is currently investigating fantasy sports operators under federal law.[8]http://www.legalsportsreport.com/daily-fantasy-sports-blocked-allowed-states/[9]Id.; http://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-justice-department-investigating-daily-fantasy-sports-business-model-1444865627.[10]http://fortune.

The U.S. Attorney claimed that the Ironman Lottery violated Florida law because it contained consideration (an entry fee of between $35 and $50, depending on the year), chance (winners are randomly selected), and a prize (the opportunity to compete in the Ironman World Championship). The lottery also violated federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1955) because WTC conducted illegal gambling in violation of a state law, remained in continuous operation in Florida since at least 2008, employed more than five persons during that time, and had more than $2,000 in revenue. As the U.S. Attorney noted, WTC would have been permitted to give away the opportunity to compete in the race, but it violated the law when it charged athletes money for the chance to win.

In a case that poker businesses all over the world have been watching, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 16, 2013 reversed Judge Jack Weinstein’s decision in United States v. DiCristina, and held that poker could be prosecuted under the Illegal Gambling Business Act (“IGBA”), 18 U.S.C. § 1955. Judge Weinstein had entered a post-verdict judgment of acquittal of defendant DiCristina on the ground that poker was a game predominated by skill that could not be prosecuted as a matter of law under IGBA.

Legendz Sports took wagers exclusively from residents of the United States using 22 domain names. The federal grand jury charged the defendants with violating the Federal Wire Act (18 U.S.C. § 1084), Interstate Travel in Aid of a Racketeering Enterprise (18 U.S.C. §1952), Operation of an Illegal Gambling Business (18 U.S.C. § 1955) and Money Laundering (18 U.S.C. §§ 1956–57). The named defendants include executive staff, agents, runners and bookies of various operations of Legendz Sports, as well as any companies that were “used to facilitate” the unlawful gaming operations, including credit card and ACH processing companies and investment advisors. Among other things, the federal government seeks criminal penalties and forfeiture of $1 billion in traceable assets of the defendants.

On August 21, 2012, the federal district court for the Eastern District of New York, in United States v. DiCristina, No. 11-CR-414, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118037 (E.D.N.Y.) (“DiCristina”), set aside Defendant’s conviction under the Illegal Gambling Business Act (“IGBA”), 18 U.S.C. §1955, and dismissed the indictment against him. In doing so, the district court determined that Texas Hold’em poker is not “gambling” under the IGBA’s definition of that term, even if it is gambling under New York law.