United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019-01-18
18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: criminal appeal after conditional guilty pleas to conspiracy, wire fraud and mail fraud; denial of Rule 12(b)(3)(B)(v) motion to dismiss the indictment (no "money or property" object) reviewed de novo on the indictment's allegations and affirmed. Co-appellants' perjury / false-statement convictions are not section 1341 matters.; result: claimant-won; claim:
Uncertainty
None recorded
Misfit
The only section 1341 question reserved by the plea agreements was the property object; deception / scheme, intent, mailing and furtherance were not contested and are not recorded.
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 7
| Case | Scheme or artifice to defraud | Traditional money or property as an object | Material deception | Knowing participation with intent to defraud | Statutory mailing or carrier act | Mailing for execution of the scheme |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Hird — 913 F.3d 332 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019 (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–7 of 7
| Case | Separate section 1346 theory; outside property-fraud claim |
|---|---|
| United States v. Hird — 913 F.3d 332 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019 (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Hird — 913 F.3d 332 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Traditional money or property as an object | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; party: William Hird (Traffic Court administrator) and Henry Alfano (private citizen); count: mail fraud counts pleaded to (Alfano 51-56, Hird 58-60), Philadelphia Traffic Court ticket-fixing; subject: party=William Hird (Traffic Court administrator) and Henry Alfano (private citizen); count=mail fraud counts pleaded to (Alfano 51-56, Hird 58-60), Philadelphia Traffic Court ticket-fixing Fines and costs imposed by judicial judgment are money legally due (Pasquantino), not a purely regulatory interest (Cleveland distinguished); the absence of any guilty judgment is no answer because the scheme's object was to prevent such judgments. Facts are the indictment's allegations, taken as true. | ticket-fixing to obviate traffic-court judgments that would impose statutory fines and costs due to city and state | In acceding to requests for "consideration," defendants were depriving the City of Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of money which would have been properly due as fines and costs.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [7543:7739] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51.In contrast, the indictment here explicitly states that the scheme deprived the City and the Commonwealth of money, and it describes the object of the scheme as obviating judgments of guilt that imposed the fines and costs.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [15630:15853] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51.The Motor Vehicle Code imposes fines and costs for each violation, eliminating any judicial discretion in this regard.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [23884:24002] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51.None of the cases directly associated with Alfano and Hird resulted in a guilty judgment.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [17883:17972] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51.Under Pasquantino , then, traffic tickets (or more precisely, judgments arising from them) are considered an "entitlement to collect money from individuals, the possession of which is 'something of value.' "Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [22728:22935] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51.We conclude that, as alleged, this scheme had the objective of preventing the City of Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from possessing a lawful entitlement to collect money in the form of fines and costs-a property interest-from individuals who Alfano and Hird assisted.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_913.jsonl#/f3d/913/0332-01; Unicode character offsets [24109:24396] (end exclusive); SHA-256 13e01e98e0549fb28ba321ff123e504931aa821c3c90e8538b8796ac798a2d51. |