Credit Card Fraud Prosecutions Under Us Law
📌 What Is Credit Card Fraud Under U.S. Law?
Credit card fraud involves the unauthorized use of a credit or debit card—or card information—to obtain goods, services, or money. It is both a federal and state crime, depending on the nature and scope of the offense.
⚖️ Key Federal Statutes
18 U.S.C. § 1029 – Fraud and related activity in connection with access devices (including credit cards).
18 U.S.C. § 1343 – Wire fraud, often used in online or digital transactions.
18 U.S.C. § 1028 – Identity theft and fraud, often overlapping with credit card fraud.
15 U.S.C. § 1644 – Fraudulent use of credit cards involving interstate commerce.
✅ Elements of Federal Credit Card Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1029)
To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove:
The defendant knowingly and intentionally used, produced, or trafficked in unauthorized access devices (credit cards, numbers, etc.).
The conduct affected interstate or foreign commerce.
The defendant acted with intent to defraud.
The fraudulent activity resulted in a loss (usually $1,000 or more for felony-level offenses).
⚖️ Detailed Case Law on Credit Card Fraud
1. United States v. Cioni, 649 F.3d 276 (4th Cir. 2011)
Facts:
Cioni and accomplices used stolen credit card numbers obtained through phishing emails to make unauthorized purchases.
Legal Issue:
Whether email phishing schemes fall under wire fraud and credit card fraud statutes.
Ruling:
The court affirmed convictions under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1029 and 1343, noting that phishing and online use of stolen credit card numbers qualify as both wire fraud and access device fraud.
Importance:
Confirmed that cyber-based credit card fraud is fully prosecutable under federal law.
Set precedent for email and internet-based schemes as wire fraud.
2. United States v. Akpan, 407 F.3d 360 (5th Cir. 2005)
Facts:
Akpan created counterfeit credit cards using stolen account information and made purchases across several states.
Legal Issue:
Whether manufacturing counterfeit cards constitutes access device fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1029.
Ruling:
Conviction affirmed. Court held that even without physical cards, using account numbers to create fake cards qualifies as access device fraud.
Importance:
Clarified that credit card numbers alone are sufficient to constitute a fraud violation.
Manufacturing or using “cloned” or fake cards is criminal even without a stolen physical card.
3. United States v. Abiodun, 536 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008)
Facts:
Abiodun was part of a ring that used stolen identity information and fabricated credit card applications to open fake accounts.
Legal Issue:
Whether applying for credit using stolen identities violates credit card and identity theft statutes.
Ruling:
Conviction upheld under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028 and 1029.
Importance:
Shows that fraudulent acquisition of credit (not just unauthorized use) qualifies as criminal.
Highlights overlap between identity theft and credit card fraud.
4. United States v. Onyesoh, 674 F. App'x 113 (3d Cir. 2017)
Facts:
Onyesoh used credit card skimming devices to steal card information from ATMs and re-encoded blank cards with stolen data.
Legal Issue:
Whether re-encoding blank cards with stolen data constitutes “trafficking in counterfeit access devices.”
Ruling:
Court held this conduct fell squarely within § 1029's prohibitions.
Importance:
Affirmed that skimming and re-encoding cards is access device fraud.
Helped define “trafficking” to include manufacturing or altering cards for use or sale.
5. United States v. Tighe, 266 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001)
Facts:
Tighe stole a wallet containing multiple credit cards and used them for unauthorized purchases.
Legal Issue:
Whether the use of stolen cards for small transactions qualifies for felony prosecution.
Ruling:
Yes. The court emphasized that even seemingly small fraudulent purchases are felonies if there’s intent and unauthorized use.
Importance:
Demonstrated that each unauthorized transaction counts as a separate offense.
Reinforced that intent to defraud is key, even in petty fraud.
6. United States v. Barrington, 648 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 2011)
Facts:
Barrington used stolen credit card numbers to make online purchases and resell the merchandise.
Legal Issue:
Whether using stolen data to buy goods for resale can be prosecuted as wire fraud and access device fraud.
Ruling:
The court upheld convictions, stating that using fraudulently obtained data in online purchases constitutes both access device fraud and wire fraud.
Importance:
Shows that resale of fraudulently obtained goods can enhance sentencing.
Reinforced the use of multiple charges (wire + credit card fraud) in prosecutions.
🧾 Summary Table: Legal Principles from Cases
| Legal Principle | Key Case | Takeaway |
|---|---|---|
| Phishing and cyber fraud are prosecutable | U.S. v. Cioni | Email schemes using stolen card data violate wire and access device statutes. |
| Counterfeit cards and account numbers count | U.S. v. Akpan | Using or producing fake cards, even digitally, is criminal fraud. |
| Fake applications using stolen identities | U.S. v. Abiodun | Fraudulent acquisition of credit = credit card and identity fraud. |
| Skimming and re-encoding = trafficking | U.S. v. Onyesoh | Re-encoding stolen data on cards qualifies as access device fraud. |
| Small uses of stolen cards are felonies | U.S. v. Tighe | Even low-dollar transactions are felony offenses under § 1029. |
| Resale of fraudulently obtained goods | U.S. v. Barrington | Increases severity and allows additional charges. |
🔒 Penalties and Sentencing
Federal credit card fraud penalties vary by the offense and dollar amount:
Felony conviction: Up to 10–20 years in prison (depending on the number of counts).
Fines: Can exceed $250,000 per count.
Restitution: Courts often order full repayment to victims.
Asset forfeiture: Any profits or property gained through fraud may be seized.
🧩 Conclusion
Credit card fraud is aggressively prosecuted at the federal level, with a broad interpretation of what constitutes “access device fraud.” These cases show:
Digital fraud (phishing, skimming, fake cards) is just as serious as physical theft.
Intent to defraud is central—even for small or isolated uses.
Credit card fraud often overlaps with identity theft, wire fraud, and conspiracy.
Courts interpret “access device” broadly to include card numbers, PINs, and digital data.
RELATED Blog
0 comments