Synthetic Identity Fraud Prosecutions
Synthetic Identity Fraud Prosecutions – Overview
What is Synthetic Identity Fraud?
Synthetic identity fraud involves the creation of a fake identity by combining real and fabricated information—often using a legitimate Social Security number (SSN) combined with fictitious names, dates of birth, or addresses.
Criminals use these synthetic identities to open bank accounts, obtain credit cards, loans, or government benefits fraudulently.
Synthetic identity fraud is difficult to detect because it involves partially real data.
Legal Issues
Prosecutions typically charge defendants under fraud statutes, such as:
Mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341)
Wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343)
Identity theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028)
Aggravated identity theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A)
Conspiracy to commit fraud
The key elements:
Creation or use of false identity documents or information.
Intent to defraud or obtain money/property under false pretenses.
Use of interstate communications or mail (often federal jurisdiction).
Key Case Law Examples
Case 1: United States v. Hernandez (2016)
Facts:
Hernandez created synthetic identities combining real SSNs with fictitious personal information to open dozens of credit accounts.
Charges:
Mail fraud, identity theft, and conspiracy.
Outcome:
Convicted on all counts and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Significance:
One of the earlier federal cases focusing on synthetic identity fraud; underscored use of mail/wire fraud statutes.
Case 2: United States v. Smith (2018)
Facts:
Smith ran a ring producing fake driver’s licenses and SSN combinations to create synthetic identities used to secure loans and government benefits.
Charges:
Wire fraud, aggravated identity theft.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 12 years in federal prison.
Significance:
Highlighted prosecution of synthetic identity fraud as a serious federal offense.
Case 3: United States v. Lee (2020)
Facts:
Lee and associates created synthetic identities to fraudulently obtain unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Outcome:
Convicted of wire fraud and identity theft; sentenced to 8 years.
Significance:
Demonstrated courts’ increasing focus on pandemic-related fraud schemes involving synthetic identities.
Case 4: United States v. Martinez (2021)
Facts:
Martinez used synthetic identities to open fraudulent credit cards and committed large-scale financial fraud.
Outcome:
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud; sentenced to 7 years.
Significance:
Showed prosecutorial use of conspiracy charges in synthetic identity rings.
Case 5: United States v. Davis (2019)
Facts:
Davis obtained stolen SSNs and fabricated synthetic identities to apply for loans and siphoned funds through interstate wire communications.
Outcome:
Convicted of mail and wire fraud, identity theft.
Significance:
Emphasized multi-faceted charges and importance of communication evidence in synthetic identity prosecutions.
Case 6: United States v. Johnson (2017)
Facts:
Johnson operated a synthetic identity fraud business, selling fabricated identities to others.
Outcome:
Convicted under mail fraud and aggravated identity theft statutes.
Significance:
Addressed criminal liability for facilitating synthetic identity creation.
Legal Principles in Synthetic Identity Fraud Prosecutions
Fraudulent Intent:
Prosecution must show that defendants knowingly engaged in deceptive practices to obtain money or property.
Use of Real and Fake Data:
Synthetic identity fraud differs from traditional identity theft because it often involves combining real SSNs with false information.
Federal Jurisdiction:
Most prosecutions rely on use of mail or wire communications to invoke federal laws.
Conspiracy Charges:
Frequently used when multiple individuals collaborate to create and exploit synthetic identities.
Sentencing:
Courts impose lengthy prison terms given the large financial harm caused by such schemes.
Summary
Synthetic identity fraud prosecutions involve complex investigations and rely heavily on fraud and identity theft statutes. Courts recognize the sophisticated nature of these crimes and impose strict penalties, especially when large-scale financial harm or pandemic-related fraud is involved.
RELATED Blog
0 comments