Source: law/18usc1341.law
# 18 U.S.C. § 1341 — Wave 2 law catalogue # Statutory text is pinned to the read-only IR record; doctrinal elements are annotations. law 18usc1341 cite 18 U.S.C. § 1341 title Mail fraud url https://www.neochart.com/catalog/federal/title_18/section_1341/title18_sec1341_90fea3fd6f12/1341_frauds_and_swindles_whoever_having_devised_or_intending_0001/index.html address catalog/federal/title_18/section_1341/title18_sec1341_90fea3fd6f12/1341_frauds_and_swindles_whoever_having_devised_or_intending_0001/index.html source ir/usc/title18.jsonl#title18_sec1341 sha1=442adbb68ff66bd9cd71689fcff6ab675794f9e4 chars=2199 claim property-fraud : scheme & property & materiality & intent & mails & furtherance gloss Core ordinary property-fraud offense; all elements require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The separately enumerated counterfeit/spurious-article limb of section 1341 is not modeled by this claim. Section 1346 honest-services fraud is a separate cross-referenced theory, not a way to label every intangible interest property. Penalty enhancements and ancillary liability are outside this core catalogue. element scheme : and name Scheme or artifice to defraud text @78..107 | scheme or artifice to defraud rule /f4th/143/146 @14885..15067 | The essential elements of mail and wire fraud are (1) a scheme to defraud, (2) money or property as the object of the scheme, and (3) use of the mails or wires to further the scheme. rule /us/527/0001-01 @37779..37953 | By prohibiting the “scheme to defraud,” rather than the completed fraud, the elements of reliance and damage would clearly be inconsistent with the statutes Congress enacted. gloss A fraudulent plan, including a deliberately false promise, is required; an unsuccessful scheme can qualify. Do not convert a mere breach of contract into fraudulent intent. not-required Actual victim reliance or completed economic damage (Neder); materiality and the statutory communication remain required. variant false-promise | A promise made as part of a fraudulent plan; later nonperformance alone does not establish fraud. variant fraudulent-inducement | Material deception induces a transaction transferring the victim's money or property; equivalent value in return is not dispositive. element property : and name Traditional money or property as an object text @126..143 | money or property rule /us/605/114 @20152..20275 | Obtaining the victim's money or property must have been the “aim,” not an “incidental byproduct,” of the defendant's fraud. rule /us/605/114 @23857..23990 | In short, the wire fraud statute is agnostic about economic loss. The statute does not so much as mention loss, let alone require it. gloss Judicial construction of the statutory property/object requirement: the property target must be an object of the scheme, not merely an incidental expense of exercising regulatory power. Traditional intangible property can qualify; intangible regulatory interests and a free-standing right to control economic decisions cannot. Kousisis preserves Ciminelli and Kelly while rejecting a net-economic-loss requirement. Its holding applies to the identical mail-fraud language (605 U.S. 114, 121 n.2). not-required Intent to cause net pecuniary loss where material deception targets a transfer of traditional property. element materiality : and name Material deception text @156..215 | false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises rule /us/527/0001-01 @38141..38269 | Accordingly, we hold that materiality of falsehood is an element of the federal mail fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud statutes. rule /f3d/922/0762-01 @1835..2017 | A fraudulent scheme must include a material misrepresentation, which is a misrepresentation that could influence the decision of a "person[ ] of ordinary prudence and comprehension." gloss Judge-made incorporation of common-law fraud, not an express word in this statute. Petlechkov supplies the Sixth Circuit's ordinary-prudence formulation, not a uniform national definition. Kousisis leaves unresolved the parties' competing formulations of the materiality standard; it does not adopt an essence-of-the-bargain test as an additional universal element. element intent : and name Knowing participation with intent to defraud text @36..73 | having devised or intending to devise rule /f4th/143/146 @28582..28849 | The Government introduced sufficient evidence to prove that DMC—led by Runner— advertised goods and services it never planned to deliver, and otherwise intentionally lied to trick customers into paying money. No more was needed for the jury to find fraudulent intent. rule /f3d/917/0668-01 @11661..11894 | Even if Hagen broke a promise to refund $12,000 for the early termination, breach of contract is not fraud, and the cashing of Penner's check in April was not in furtherance of any dispute that arose at the end of the grazing season. gloss Judicial construction of the scheme language requires fraudulent intent, distinct from negligence or contract breach. A deliberate material deception aimed at obtaining the victim's property suffices without intent to leave the victim economically worse off. Earlier intent-to-harm formulations must be read subject to Kousisis. element mails : and name Statutory mailing or carrier act text @584..650 | places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter text @652..726 | any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service text @728..866 | or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier text @868..924 | or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing text @926..1141 | or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing rule /f3d/96/1223-01 @16365..16613 | Instead, if the defendant “does an act with knowledge that the use of the mails will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where such use can reasonably be foreseen, even though not actually intended, then he ‘causes’ the mails to be used.” gloss Alternative statutory acts are placing, depositing/causing deposit, taking/receiving, or knowingly causing delivery; they are not cumulative requirements. USPS use need not itself cross a state line; the alternative private/commercial carrier must meet the statutory interstate-carrier description. Hubbard, 96 F.3d 1223, 1228–1229 (9th Cir. 1996), applies Pereira's construction of causation: personal mailing or specific intent to use the mails is unnecessary where ordinary-course use is known or reasonably foreseeable. The causation inquiry is distinct from whether the mailing executes the scheme; mere foreseeability of a mailing does not establish furtherance. Hubbard's conspiracy posture does not import agreement or overt-act elements here. variant postal-service | Sending or delivery by the Postal Service. variant private-carrier | Deposit or delivery by a private or commercial interstate carrier, under the operative statutory language. element furtherance : and name Mailing for execution of the scheme text @507..582 | for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do rule /us/553/0639-01 @9839..10169 | The gravamen of the offense is the scheme to defraud, and any “mailing that is incident to an essential part of the scheme satisfies the mailing element,” Schmuck v. United States, 489 U. S. 705, 712 (1989) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), even if the mailing itself “contain[s] no false information,” id., at 715. rule /f3d/917/0668-01 @14265..14407 | Under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, the alleged use of the mail must be "sufficiently closely related to," and operate to further, the defendant's scheme. rule /f-supp-3d/370/1139-01 @20843..20937 | Mailings made to further any of these activities would satisfy the "use of the mails" element. gloss Evaluate the mailing against the actual scope and completion of the scheme. Bridge, 553 U.S. 639, 647 (2008), states the substantive mail-fraud nexus while deciding a civil RICO case; its separate RICO injury requirements do not become mail-fraud elements. Lulling mailings can further an ongoing scheme, but Hagen rejected incidental letters after the charged scheme was complete; Gross found collection mailings within an ongoing kickback scheme at the indictment stage. not-required The mailing itself contains a false statement; an innocent mailing incident to an essential part of the scheme can suffice. constraint domestic-application(scheme, mails) : Identify sufficient domestic conduct when a cross-border scheme is alleged rule /f3d/927/0108-01 @33665..33939 | We therefore hold that a claim predicated on mail or wire fraud involves sufficient domestic conduct when (1) the defendant used domestic mail or wires in furtherance of a scheme to defraud, and (2) the use of the mail or wires was a core component of the scheme to defraud. gloss Second Circuit domestic-application holding in a civil RICO case; do not replace ordinary furtherance with this core-component formulation in every domestic prosecution. element honest-services-boundary : and name Separate section 1346 theory; outside property-fraud claim text @78..107 | scheme or artifice to defraud rule /f3d/926/0361-01 @9374..9439 | An honest services fraud scheme covers only bribery or kickbacks. gloss Section 1346 supplies the intangible-right theory. Do not combine its different target with the property element above. Its bribery/kickback and fiduciary-duty limits require separate analysis; this boundary node is not a complete honest-services claim. xref 18 U.S.C. § 1346 | Definition extending scheme or artifice to defraud to deprivation of the intangible right of honest services.