Ballot Tampering Prosecution Studies
โ๏ธ 1. United States v. Thomas (2005)
๐ Facts:
Thomas, a city official in Alabama, tampered with absentee ballots by filling them out for voters or altering them after collection, in a local election with tight margins.
๐ Legal Issues:
Charged under 18 U.S.C. ยง 1341 (mail fraud) and election fraud statutes.
Government argued this compromised the integrity of mail-in voting.
โ Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to prison.
The court emphasized the use of federal mail fraud laws to prosecute election interference.
๐ Significance:
Demonstrated how ballot tampering with absentee votes can fall under federal jurisdiction.
โ๏ธ 2. United States v. Rodriguez (2012)
๐ Facts:
Rodriguez, a political campaign worker in Texas, collected ballots from elderly voters in a nursing home and allegedly filled them out or modified them before submission.
๐ Legal Issues:
Charged with illegal voting, ballot fraud, and unlawful assistance to a voter under Texas law.
State prosecutors used witness testimony and handwriting analysis as key evidence.
โ Outcome:
Convicted; received a prison sentence.
Appeals upheld the conviction due to clear evidence of voter manipulation.
๐ Significance:
Emphasized the vulnerability of elderly and assisted voters to manipulation.
Reinforced that state laws can handle ballot tampering even without federal charges.
โ๏ธ 3. State of North Carolina v. Dowless (2019)
๐ Facts:
McCrae Dowless was hired by a congressional campaign in North Carolina. He and his associates collected absentee ballots from voters โ a violation of state law โ and allegedly altered or selectively submitted them to favor one candidate.
๐ Legal Issues:
Investigated for illegal ballot harvesting, obstruction of justice, and fraudulent voter assistance.
Notably led to the invalidating of an entire U.S. House election.
โ Outcome:
Dowless was indicted and later pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges.
The election was re-run, and the campaign he worked for was discredited.
๐ Significance:
One of the most serious modern ballot fraud scandals.
Showed how systematic absentee ballot manipulation can undo elections.
โ๏ธ 4. United States v. Riddle (2000)
๐ Facts:
Riddle, a former election judge in Illinois, was found to have altered punch card ballots during the vote-counting process in a close local election.
๐ Legal Issues:
Charged with election fraud and interference with a federal election.
Witnesses testified he was seen tampering with ballots during adjudication.
โ Outcome:
Convicted and received a sentence including jail time and probation.
Highlighted that even election officials are not immune from prosecution.
๐ Significance:
Underscored need for ballot chain-of-custody safeguards and transparent recounts.
โ๏ธ 5. United States v. Monroe (2011)
๐ Facts:
Monroe created counterfeit absentee ballots for submission in a municipal election. He used stolen voter data and forged signatures.
๐ Legal Issues:
Charged under federal identity fraud and election fraud statutes.
Forensic document experts proved the signatures were forged.
โ Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to prison and barred from political work.
Judge stressed the intent to deceive the electoral system.
๐ Significance:
Reinforced the link between identity theft and ballot fraud.
Encouraged better verification of absentee ballots.
โ๏ธ 6. State of Wisconsin v. Lewis (2008)
๐ Facts:
Lewis was found to have submitted multiple ballots under different names using fake registration info.
๐ Legal Issues:
Prosecuted under state election laws for double voting, false registration, and perjury.
Investigators used IP address tracking and handwriting comparisons.
โ Outcome:
Convicted on several counts and received jail time.
Judge noted the premeditated nature of the fraud.
๐ Significance:
Addressed the myth that individual voter fraud is rare โ it is rare, but still prosecuted when found.
โ๏ธ Common Legal Tools in Ballot Tampering Cases
| Legal Tool / Charge | When It's Used |
|---|---|
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1341 (Mail Fraud) | If fraud involves ballots sent via U.S. mail. |
| State Election Codes | Vary by state; used to prosecute ballot collection and alteration. |
| False Statement / Forgery | When signatures or voter info is falsified. |
| Obstruction of Justice | When fraud interferes with vote counting or official proceedings. |
| Identity Theft | For fake voter identities or stolen personal data. |
Conclusion
These cases show that ballot tampering can occur at multiple stages โ during voter registration, ballot collection, submission, or vote counting. Both state and federal authorities are involved in these prosecutions, depending on the scope and method of the fraud.
RELATED Blog
0 comments