White Collar Crime Prosecutions for December 2007

Number Latest Month 548
Percent Change from previous month -4.9
Percent Change from 1 year ago -1.2
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) -22.0
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) -24.4

Table 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during December 2007 the government reported 548 new white collar crime prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is down 4.9% over the previous month.

White Collar Crime

This report summarizes the government's recent efforts when it comes to combating white collar crime—the number of such cases, the investigative agencies involved, the laws cited, the busiest federal districts and the busiest federal judges.

See more...

The comparisons of the number of defendants charged with white collar crime-related offenses are based on case-by-case information obtained by TRAC under the Freedom of Information Act from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys. (See Table 1)

When monthly 2007 prosecutions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of filings was only slightlydown (-1.2 percent). Prosecutions over the past year are still much lower than they were five years ago. Overall, the data show that prosecutions of this type are down 22 percent from levels reported in 2002.

The decrease from the levels five years ago in white collar crime prosecutions for these matters is shown more clearly in Figure 1. The vertical bars in Figure 1 represent the number of white collar crime prosecutions of this type recorded on a month-to-month basis. The superimposed line on the bars plots the six-month moving average so that natural fluctuations are smoothed out. The one and five-year rates of change in Table 1 and in the sections that follow are all based upon this six-month moving average. To view trends year-by-year rather than month-by-month, see TRAC's annual report series for a broader picture.

FYMONDT: Jan2001
_FREQ_: 681 FYMONDT: Feb2001
_FREQ_: 738 FYMONDT: Mar2001
_FREQ_: 1,086 FYMONDT: Apr2001
_FREQ_: 863 FYMONDT: May2001
_FREQ_: 1,022 FYMONDT: Jun2001
_FREQ_: 784 FYMONDT: Jul2001
_FREQ_: 770 FYMONDT: Aug2001
_FREQ_: 847 FYMONDT: Sep2001
_FREQ_: 749 FYMONDT: Oct2001
_FREQ_: 760 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 687 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 635 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 757 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 623 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 724 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 982 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 856 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 937 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 917 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 887 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 910 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 787 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 652 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 642 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 775 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 923 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 901 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 878 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 854 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 819 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 791 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 737 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 826 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 759 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 679 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 741 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 762 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 673 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 970 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 881 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 665 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 727 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 557 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 631 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 660 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 577 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 544 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 563 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 517 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 562 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 774 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 806 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 739 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 660 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 614 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 732 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 657 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 588 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 602 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 599 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 556 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 540 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 805 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 642 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 641 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 665 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 547 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 688 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 596 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 606 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 685 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 665 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 615 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 548 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 744 FYMONDT: Apr2007
_FREQ_: 690 FYMONDT: May2007
_FREQ_: 707 FYMONDT: Jun2007
_FREQ_: 598 FYMONDT: Jul2007
_FREQ_: 622 FYMONDT: Aug2007
_FREQ_: 740 FYMONDT: Sep2007
_FREQ_: 680 FYMONDT: Oct2007
_FREQ_: 575 FYMONDT: Nov2007
_FREQ_: 576 FYMONDT: Dec2007
_FREQ_: 548 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 862.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 877.16666667 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 895.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 839.16666667 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 822 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 766.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 741.33333333 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 739.16666667 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 701.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 697.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 734.66666667 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 762.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 813.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 839.83333333 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 883.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 914.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 882.33333333 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 848.33333333 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 799.16666667 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 775.5 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 781.5 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 780 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 795.16666667 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 828.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 858.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 861 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 830 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 817.5 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 797.66666667 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 768.5 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 755.5 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 750.66666667 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 740 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 764 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 784.33333333 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 782 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 779.66666667 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 745.5 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 738.5 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 686.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 636.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 616 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 588.66666667 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 582 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 570.5 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 589.5 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 627.66666667 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 660.16666667 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 676.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 692.5 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 720.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 701.33333333 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 665 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 642.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 632 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 622.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 590.33333333 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 615 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 624 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 630.5 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 641.5 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 640 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 664.66666667 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 629.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 623.83333333 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 631.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 631.16666667 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 642.5 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 619.16666667 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 643.83333333 FYMONDT: Apr2007
moveave: 657.83333333 FYMONDT: May2007
moveave: 661.5 FYMONDT: Jun2007
moveave: 650.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2007
moveave: 651.5 FYMONDT: Aug2007
moveave: 683.5 FYMONDT: Sep2007
moveave: 672.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2007
moveave: 653.66666667 FYMONDT: Nov2007
moveave: 631.83333333 FYMONDT: Dec2007
moveave: 623.5
Plot of moveave * FYMONDT

Figure 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Prosecutions over the last five years

Within the broad category of white collar crime, cases were classified by prosecutors into more specific types.

Case types within white collar crime are

• Federal Procurement Fraud

• Federal Program Fraud

• Tax Fraud

• Arson for Profit

• Other Insurance Fraud

• Financial Institution Fraud

• Bankruptcy Fraud

• Advance Fee Schemes

• Other Fraud Against Businesses

• Consumer Fraud

• Securities Fraud

• Commodities Fraud

• Other Investment Fraud

• Antitrust Violations - Other

• Computer Fraud

• Health Care Fraud

• Fraud Against Insurance Providers

• Intellectual Property Violations

• Insider Fraud Against Insurance Providers

• MEWA (Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements) Fraud/MET

• Antitrust Violations - Airlines

• Antitrust Violations - Banking

• Antitrust Violations - Defense Procurement

• Antitrust Violations - Extraterritorial Application Of

• Antitrust Violations - Finance Markets, Other than Banking

• Telemarketing Fraud

• Corporate Fraud

• Identity Theft

• Aggravated Identity Theft

• Other White Collar Crime/Fraud

The largest number of prosecutions of these matters in December 2007 was for "Fraud-Financial Institution", accounting for 23.9 percent of prosecutions. Prosecutions were also filed for "Fraud-Federal Program" (18.1%), "Fraud-Other" ( 14.8%), "Other-Not Specified" (13.1%), "Fraud-Other Business" (8.4%), "Fraud-Health Care" (6.4%), "Fraud-Tax" (5.3%), "Fraud-Computer" (2.7%), "Fraud-Securities" (2.2%). See Figure 2.

The lead investigative agency for white collar crime prosecutions in December 2007 was FBI accounting for 26 percent of prosecutions referred. Other agencies with substantial numbers of white collar crime referrals were: SecServ (20% ), Postal (11%), IRS (9%), DHS (8%). See Figure 3.

progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 58%  (58.03%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (18.07%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (18.07%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (18.07%)
PIE3D chart of progcatlabel

Figure 2: Specific types of prosecutions
agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 20%  (20.07%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 11%  (11.31%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 26%  (26.46%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 9%  (8.58%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 9%  (8.58%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 9%  (8.58%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.73%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.73%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.73%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.73%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.73%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 8%  (7.85%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 8%  (7.85%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 8%  (7.85%)
PIE3D chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 3: Prosecutions by Investigative Agency

White Collar Crime Prosecutions in U.S. Magistrate Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

In December 2007, 10 percent of white collar crime cases for these matters took place in U.S. Magistrate Courts which handle less serious misdemeanor cases, including what are called "petty offenses." In the magistrate courts in December the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1029 involving the "Fraud and related activity - access devices". This was the lead charge for 17.5 percent of all magistrate filings in December.

Other frequently prosecuted lead charges include: "18 USC 1344 - Bank fraud" (14%), "18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents" (8.8%), "18 USC 1546 - Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents" (8.8%).

White Collar Crime Prosecutions in U.S. District Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

Table 2 shows the top lead charges recorded in the prosecutions of white collar crime matters filed in U.S. District Court during December 2007.

Lead Charge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
18 USC 1344 - Bank fraud 67 1 1 1 More
18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles 41 2 2 2 More
18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents 35 3 5 7 More
18 USC 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television 32 4 4 6 More
18 USC 1029 - Fraud and related activity - access devices 28 5 6 4 More
18 USC 1001 - Fraud/false statements or entries generally 26 6 8 8 More
18 USC 641 - Public money, property or records 21 7 7 9 More
18 USC 513 - Securities of the States and private entities 19 8 16 16 More
18 USC 1347 - Health Care Fraud 18 9 14 10 More
18 USC 287 - False, fictitious or fraudulent claims 16 10 9 19 More

Table 2: Top charges filed

  • "Bank fraud" (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1344) was the most frequent recorded lead charge. "Bank fraud" (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1344) was ranked 1 a year ago, while it was the 1 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

  • Ranked 2nd in frequency was the lead charge "Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1341. "Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1341 was ranked 2 a year ago, while it was the 2 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

  • Ranked 3rd was "Fraud and related activity - id documents" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1028. "Fraud and related activity - id documents" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1028 was ranked 5 a year ago, while it was the 7 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in prosecutions—up 69.2 percent—compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1347 that involves " Health Care Fraud ". Compared to five years ago, the largest increase—72.7 percent—was registered for prosecutions under " Fraud and related activity - id documents " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1028 ).

Again among the top ten lead charges, the one showing the sharpest decline in prosecutions compared to one year ago—down 27.1 percent—was False, fictitious or fraudulent claims (Title 18 U.S.C Section 287 ). Compared to five years ago, the most significant decline in prosecutions— 50.1 percent—was for filings where the lead charge was " Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1341 ).

Top Ranked Judicial Districts

In December 2007 the Justice Department said the government brought 196.8 white collar crime prosecutions for every ten million people in the United States.

Understandably, there is great variation in the per capita number of white collar crime prosecutions that are filed in each of the nation's ninety-four federal judicial districts.

The districts registering the largest number of prosecutions per capita for these matters last month are shown in Table 3. Districts must have at least 5 white collar crime prosecutions to receive a ranking.


Judicial District Percapita Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
Alaska 3,045 17 1 72 72 More
Miss, S 1,789 27 2 9 37 More
Ala, S 736 5 3 70 42 More
Ohio, N 715 35 4 11 4 More
N. Y., S 663 28 5 2 3 More
Montana 635 5 6 31 78 More
Fla, S 530 29 7 1 6 More
Okla, W 511 8 8 39 53 More
Mo, E 415 10 9 12 23 More
N Car, M 408 9 10 54 78 More

Table 3: Top 10 districts (per ten million people)

  • The District of Alaska—with 3045 prosecutions as compared with 196.8 prosecutions per ten million population in the United States—was the most active during December 2007.

  • The Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson) ranked 2nd. The Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson) was ranked 9 a year ago.

  • Southern District of Alabama (Mobile) is now ranking 3rd.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland), now ranked 4th , and Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis) at 9th In the same order, these districts ranked 11th and 12th one year ago and 4th and 23rd five years ago.

The federal judicial district which showed the greatest growth in the rate of white collar crime prosecutions compared to one year ago— 157.1 percent—was Southern District of Alabama (Mobile). Compared to five years ago, the district with the largest growth— 221.1 percent—was Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson).

In the last year, the judicial District Court recording the largest drop in the rate of white collar crime prosecutions— 48.7 percent—was Montana .  But over the past five years, Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) showed the largest drop— 59.1 percent.

Top Ranked District Judges

At any one time, there are about 680 federal District Court judges working in the United States. The judges recorded with the largest number of new white collar crime crime cases of this type during December 2007 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank  
Beistline, Ralph R. Alaska 10 1 More
Moody, James S. Jr. Fla, M 8 2 More
Adams, John R. Ohio, N 8 2 More
Leonard, Timothy D. Okla, W 8 2 More
Lee, Tom Stewart Miss, S 7 5 More
Nottingham, Edward Willis Jr. Colorado 6 6 More
Middlebrooks, Donald M. Fla, S 6 6 More
Fitzwater, Sidney Allen Texas, N 6 6 More
Ryskamp, Kenneth L. Fla, S 5 9 More
Sedwick, John W. Alaska 4 10 More
Huck, Paul C. Fla, S 4 10 More
Gilbert, John Phil Ill, S 4 10 More
Bunning, David L. Ken, E 4 10 More
Guirola, Louis Jr. Miss, S 4 10 More
Laughrey, Nanette Kay Mo, W 4 10 More
Linares, Jose L. N. J. 4 10 More
Watson, Michael H. Ohio, S 4 10 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

A total of 9 out of the "top ten" judges were in districts which were in the top ten with the largest number of white collar crime filings per capita, while the remaining 8 judges were from other districts. (Because of ties, there were a total of 17 judges in the "top ten" rankings.)

  • Judge Ralph R. Beistline in the District of Alaska ranked 1st with 10 defendants in white collar crime cases.

  • Judges James S. Moody Jr. in the Middle District of Florida (Tampa), John R. Adams in the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) and Timothy D. Leonard in the Western District of Oklahoma (Oklahoma City) ranked 2nd with 8 defendants in white collar crime cases.

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2008, TRAC Reports, Inc.

TRAC RSS Feed for this page Email Feed for this page Email this page