UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
ALVIN WILLIS, JR., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant's conviction for interstate transportation of a forged security was valid, as the statute under which he was convicted does not require the mailing to occur after the fraud's fruition.
The defendant deposited a forged check in his bank account, and later drew the money after the check cleared. He was convicted of interstate transport…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interstate Transportation Of Forged Securities cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
On stipulated facts, Defendant was found guilty of interstate transportation of a forged security. We affirm.
He contends here that United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395, 94 S.Ct. 645, 38 L.Ed.2d 603 (1974) bars his conviction because the fruition of the alleged scheme occurred after the mails were utilized. (In Maze, a case under the mail fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, the mailing occurred after the fraud was consummated so the Court held that the use of the mails had not been “for the purpose of executing such [fraudulent] scheme or artifice” as the statute required.)
Here the essential stipulated facts were that Willis knowingly and fraudu lently deposited a forged $12,500 check drawn on a Texas bank in his California bank account knowing that the signature of the drawer was forged; and that Willis drew the money after the forged check cleared the Texas bank.
The rule of Maze is inapposite here. Its application is restricted to mail fraud cases — the mail fraud statute’s peculiar language, i. e. that use of the mails be for the purpose of executing a fraudulent scheme, is not present in 18 U.S.C. § 2314, the statute under which Willis was convicted.
All § 2314 requires is that Defendant either transport or cause to be transported in interstate commerce the forged security knowing it was forged.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Walls, 577 F.2d 690 (9th Cir. 1978)
-
United States v. Simpson, 577 F.2d 78 (9th Cir. 1978)
-
United States v. Sparrow, 614 F.2d 229 (10th Cir. 1980)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395 (U.S. 1974)