Shaw v. United States

Shaw v. United States, 580 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case that clarified the application of the federal bank fraud statute to cases where a defendant intends to only defraud a customer of the bank, rather than the bank itself.[1]

Shaw v. United States
Argued October 4, 2016
Decided December 12, 2016
Full case nameLawrence Eugene Shaw, Petitioner v. United States
Docket no.15–5991
Citations580 U.S. ___ (more)
137 S. Ct. 462; 196 L. Ed. 2d 372
Opinion announcementOpinion announcement
Case history
PriorUnited States v. Shaw, 781 F.3d 1130 (9th Cir. 2015)
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Case opinion
MajorityBreyer, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
18 U.S.C. § 1344

Background

Lawrence Shaw received the information from a bank account at Bank of America that belonged to a customer, Stanley Hsu. Shaw used that information to take money from Hsu but did not directly steal from the bank. Shaw was convicted under a federal statute criminalizing fraud against banks and appealed, arguing his target was its customer.

Decision

In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer, the Court held that a scheme to defraud customers also deprives the bank of money in which the bank held a "property right", and criminal defendants may therefore be convicted under the federal statute for schemes to defraud bank customers.[2] However, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to determine whether the trial court administered an erroneous jury instruction.[3]

gollark: No, but just quoting bits of a video isn't exactly very helpful.
gollark: Well, it's definitely not a good *summary*.
gollark: That doesn't seem particularly sensical, which I suppose you might expect for anything randomly pulled out of a long video.
gollark: You *really* like saying "boomer papers", don't you.
gollark: It's "not real" in the sense that numbers and differential equations and perfectly accurate triangles and such do not exist in reality, but do allow you to make really good models of it.

See also

References
  1. Shaw v. United States, No. 15–5991, 580 U.S. ___ (2016), slip. op. at 1.
  2. Shaw, slip. op. at 1-3.
  3. Shaw, slip. op. at 8-9.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.