Mail Fraud Defenses Used by Criminal Lawyers

There are numerous mail fraud defenses criminal lawyers use but each defense has to negate at least one of the two elements of mail fraud to be successful. Prosecuting attorneys must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, mail fraud occurred because the defendant formed or planned a scheme to defraud or had intention to do so. The prosecution must also prove the use of mail as a step in the plot or essential part of the scheme. In effect the mailing must be "in furtherance", (Mail fraud case- Kann v. United States, 323 U.S. 88, 95), of the scheme to defraud.

The overly broad nature of both elements of mail fraud make it a convenient tool for prosecuting attorneys to use, but case histories have limited its power. Since the mail fraud statute was enacted there have been amendments and hundreds of cases further defining it's scope and use. Along the way, there have been some common mail fraud defenses developed by criminal lawyers applied in a general sense. However, experienced criminal lawyers know the real work is in the details and what separates the mediocre from the best lawyers.

Common Mail Fraud Defenses used by Criminal Lawyers:

• Good Faith is a complete defense seeking to prove a defendant had no intention to defraud. It is whole because, if successful, shows an absence of fraud.
• Puffing is a defense used by criminal lawyers contending that alleged misrepresentations are matters of opinion made by the defendant rather than intent to defraud. It is the degree of "puffing" that must be argued by lawyers and what is usually the issue in court. If there exists evidence of actual and obvious statements made about a service or product that in no way could have been possessed than this is not suitable defense.
• Constructive Fraud defense is used by criminal lawyers when proving there was no intended fraud but rather the result of careless business conduct and gross negligence.
• Lack of Authority of an employee or other agent who performed or schemed fraudulent acts not authorized by the defendant.
• Uncertainty of criminal mail fraud laws is used by criminal lawyers in showing the defendant's acts are not specifically prohibited. Criminal lawyers often use this defense in conjunction with other defenses such as "puffing."
• Statute of Limitations on Mail Fraud has run out. The statute of limitations for mail fraud is 5 years. If the mail fraud was allegedly targeting a financial institution, the statute of limitations is 10 years. For a all mail fraud cases the statute of limitations starts when the last use of mail was done, not when the scheme was devised.

There are many facets to successfully invalidating a mail fraud charge against a client by criminal lawyers, including having experience in federal courts, knowing how to build rapport with the jury, knowing when and how to deliver your arguments, knowing which witnesses to call to stand and asking questions to get favorable responses and much more. Criminal lawyers know defending mail fraud is not a walk in the park, quite the contrary. The best criminal lawyers also know how to make split-second decisions and strategic maneuvers during trials. Top criminal lawyers use a wealth of resources and dedicate lots of time behind the scenes in building a unique defense appropriate to the client and the specifics of the case.

Though there are some common defenses used for mail fraud it is the way experienced criminal lawyers innovate these defenses and, in effect, make them new that can really throw the attorneys working as the prosecution for a loop. Of course, criminal lawyers also use completely new mail fraud defenses and defense tactics as necessary in gaining a favorable outcome.

If you have been charged or are being investigated for mail fraud, (and other conjoining charges such as wire fraud), it is imperative you speak to criminal lawyers now and call 855-LAW-PRO1 (855-529-7761). The earlier a criminal lawyer can start on your case the easier the defense; criminal lawyers may also prevent or lessen the charges filed.

Sentencing for Mail & Wire Fraud Conspiracy Argued by Criminal Lawyers

When sentencing for mail fraud and wire fraud conspiracy is argued by criminal lawyers there are complex issues that can be raised in building a good defense. In a recent mail fraud and wire fraud conspiracy case, USA v. Juncal, criminal lawyers brought up an interesting but important issue in intended loss versus actual loss.

The mail fraud and wire fraud conspiracy involved 4 defendants trying to lure a broker into financing an imaginary Siberian oil pipeline. The 4 defendants were attempting to borrow 3 billion dollars from a hedge fund. 

Sentencing by the District Court

All defendants in this federal case were found guilty of mail fraud and wire fraud conspiracy. Each received a sentence of 20 years in federal prison plus 3 years of supervised release.

Mountain of Evidence for the Mail and Wire Fraud Conspiracy

In building their case, the prosecuting attorney and FBI had inside informants, recorded conversations, emails, documents, and the defendants had even admitted to their crimes. The mountain of evidence and admittance of guilt on attempted fraud was enough to make any criminal lawyer cringe. However, when there is absolutely no way of proving innocence, criminal lawyers must show the unique circumstances and characteristics of the case and the defendants to compel the judge to diverge from the federal sentencing guidelines. Criminal lawyers must show how unreasonable a sentence is in light of the true nature of the crime committed or attempted.

The Appeal

The defendants appealed the sentencing and conviction for mail fraud and wire fraud conspiracy. The criminal lawyers argued in the appeal that no reasonable investment professional would have believed such an absurd story and that every bank must engage in due diligence and investigate a potential client when applying for a loan.

The brokers did, in fact, admit to bursting into laughter, when sharing the applicants information with his colleagues. The defendants were trying to pass off as wealthy bankers consisting of a coalition of Buryatian nationals and Yamasee tribesmen using AOL email accounts and obviously doctored copies of T-notes to be used as collateral for 5 billion dollars. A simple Google search by the broker revealed the Yamasee tribal confederation had broken up in the 18th century. Even the terms of the proposal were comical as it promised the lender 14 billion dollars in profit over 5 years.

Criminal lawyers demonstrated well in the appeal that there really was no real victim and the conspiracy to defraud involved no actual loss or even probable loss. The District Court treated the conspiracy as a multi-billion dollar fraud, without taking into account the total circumstances of the case, which led to unfair sentencing for this particular mail and wire fraud conspiracy.

The criminal lawyers were successful in showing the sentences imposed on the appellants were excessively unreasonable. Today, July 23 of year 2013, the judge ruled in favor of resentencing to take into account all the factors of the mail and wire fraud conspiracy case and directed the District Court to not impose sentences greater than necessary. Top criminal lawyers from LibertyBell Law Group applaud the judge in taking action to reduce the sentence for the 4 defendants.

Criminal Lawyers on Fraud Defense

LibertyBell Law Group Criminal lawyers deal with bank, mail, and wire fraud the most. In building a defense, criminal lawyers often use the same underlying theory. The most common defense for fraud criminal lawyers use is the client acted in good faith. Criminal lawyers use the good faith defense to show an absolute absence of fraud to prove the client's innocence.

Using the good faith defense for bank, wire, and mail fraud by criminal lawyers has been treated differently by the courts in the way they give jury instructions. LibertyBell Law Group's criminal lawyers know the unique characteristics of the courts and their differing opinions. They know that in some courts they must prove good faith beyond a reasonable doubt. They also know that in some other courts they must prove that not only did the client honestly believe the investment would be successful, but also that the client did not intentionally misrepresent earnings or the customer base.

This leads us to another fraud defense used by criminal lawyers, which is criminal intention was not owned by the client but rather by a third party, business partner or employee who is also a decision maker. Criminal lawyers most often term this as the "innocent decision maker", though some courts do not accept this defense for fraud.

A good fraud defense involves criminal lawyers proving an absence of intent to defraud, absence of negligence, and absence of recklessness. The prosecuting attorneys must prove actual knowledge of fraud being committed. LibertyBell Law Group criminal lawyers show that the mental state of the client had no intent to deceive, manipulate or defraud.

It takes great skill and expertise to find and use evidence in each particular fraud case supporting a winning defense. The theory is not in itself of much surprise or importance as the actual evidence and arguments made by criminal lawyers in defense against fraud. In fact, most criminal lawyers use the same defenses, but the way in which they conduct investigations, present evidence and arguments, and interrogate witnesses among other tactics can vary significantly depending on their own individual abilities and resources.

Top criminal lawyers have a wealth of resources and work on a team of attorneys and experts and together they dissect and piece together a winning fraud defense. The best criminal lawyers, like those from LibertyBell Law Group, are known for the winning case results and are well respected by judges, clients, and other attorneys.