JOHN T.
FLOYD LAW
FIRM
Federal Criminal Defense
Lawyer
EXPERIENCED FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWYER
TRIALS, SENTENCINGS, AND APPEALS
SERIOUS FEDERAL CRIMINAL DEFENSE
Phone (713) 224-0101
E-mail jfloyd@JohnTFloyd.com
"Serious Federal Criminal
Defense Throughout Texas
"
White-Collar Crime: an overview
The phrase "white-collar crime" was coined in 1939 during a speech given by Edwin Sutherland to the American Sociological Society. Sutherland defined the term as "crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation." Although there has been some debate as to what qualifies as a white-collar crime, the term today generally encompasses a variety of nonviolent crimes usually committed in commercial situations for financial gain. Many white-collar crimes are especially difficult to prosecute because the perpetrators are sophisticated criminals who have attempted to conceal their activities through a series of complex transactions.
The most common white-collar offenses include: antitrust violations, computer and internet fraud, credit card fraud, phone and telemarketing fraud, bankruptcy fraud, healthcare fraud, environmental law violations, insurance fraud, mail fraud, government fraud, tax evasion, financial fraud, securities fraud, insider trading, bribery, kickbacks, counterfeiting, public corruption, money laundering,embezzlement, economic espionage and trade secret theft. According to the federal bureau of investigation, white-collar crime is estimated to cost the United States more than $300 billion annually.
Although white-collar criminal charges are usually brought against individuals, corporations may also be subject to sanctions for these types of offenses. The penalties for white-collar offenses include fines, home detention, community confinement, costs of prosecution, forfeitures, restitution, supervised release, and imprisonment. However, sanctions can be lessened if the defendant takes responsibility for the crime and assists the authorities in their investigation. Any defenses available to non-white-collar defendants in criminal court are also available to those accused of white-collar crimes. A common refrain of individuals or organizations facing white-collar criminal charges is the defense of entrapment. For instance, in United States v. Williams, 705 F.2d 603 (2nd Cir. 1983), one of the cases arising from "Operation Abscam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abscam)," Senator Harrison Williams attempted unsuccessfully to argue that the government induced him into accepting a bribe.
Both state and federal legislation enumerate the activities that constitute white-collar criminal offenses. The Commerce Clause (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8) of the U.S. Constitution (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html) gives the federal government the authority to regulate white-collar crime, and a number of federal agencies (see sidebar), including the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service, the Secret Service, U.S. Customs, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, participate in the enforcement of federal white-collar crime legislation.
"Although it took some time before federal prosecutors began to use RICO
expansively, it is now widely used against many types of crime, including white
collar crime." O. Obermaier and R. Morvillo, White Collar Crime: Business
and Regulatory Offenses, § 11.03, at 11-6 (Rel. 2, 1991). RICO's prohibited
activities are provided at 18 U.S.C. § 1962. Violations of either Section
1341 or 1343 or both may be used by prosecutors as the predicate acts necessary
to establish a RICO violation. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(B) ("racketeering
activity" defined to include "any act which is indictable under .
. . . section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire
fraud) . . . .").
If the other requisite elements of a RICO violation can be established, a defendant who has committed the predicate acts of mail or wire fraud may be subjected to more severe sanctions than those imposed for a mail or wire fraud conviction. For example, the United States Sentencing Guidelines provide that the minimum base offense level for unlawful conduct relating to a RICO conviction is 19. U.S.S.G. § 2E1.1. In addition, the government may seek civil (18 U.S.C. § 1964) or criminal (18 U.S.C. § 1963(a)(1)-(3)) forfeiture of assets. "Courts have generally held that RICO criminal forfeiture is mandatory upon the defendant's conviction." O. Obermaier and R. Morvillo, § 11.05, at 11-22 (citing cases from the Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits). The property subject to forfeiture includes "real property" and "tangible and intangible personal property." See § 1963(b).
[ Back to top ]
