White Collar Crime Prosecutions for December 2009

Number Latest Month 674
Percent Change from previous month 9.2
Percent Change from 1 year ago 8.8
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) 19.9
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) 1.8

Table 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during December 2009 the government reported 674 new white collar crime prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is up 9.2% 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 2009 prosecutions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of filings was up (8.8 percent). Prosecutions over the past year are still much higher than they were five years ago. Overall, the data show that prosecutions of this type are up 19.9 percent from levels reported in 2004.

The growth in these cases is partly related to increases in the matters filed in U.S. Magistrate Courts. If magistrate cases are excluded and only Federal District Court cases are counted, the overall increase in white collar crime prosecutions is 1.8 percent instead of 19.9 percent. The evidence suggests that part of the difference may be the result of improvements in the recording of the magistrate cases by the Justice Department.

The increase 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. Where a prosecution was initially filed in U.S. Magistrate Court and then transferred to the U.S. District Court, the magistrate filing date was used since this provides an earlier indicator of actual trends. 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_: 737 FYMONDT: Mar2001
_FREQ_: 1,088 FYMONDT: Apr2001
_FREQ_: 864 FYMONDT: May2001
_FREQ_: 1,026 FYMONDT: Jun2001
_FREQ_: 786 FYMONDT: Jul2001
_FREQ_: 773 FYMONDT: Aug2001
_FREQ_: 851 FYMONDT: Sep2001
_FREQ_: 749 FYMONDT: Oct2001
_FREQ_: 757 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 689 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 635 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 758 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 623 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 732 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 982 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 859 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 924 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 915 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 891 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 904 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 794 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 649 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 644 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 769 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 915 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 908 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 879 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 860 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 824 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 818 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 747 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 881 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 778 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 678 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 701 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 774 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 719 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 956 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 862 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 647 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 728 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 549 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 616 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 627 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 569 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 514 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 575 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 517 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 582 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 790 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 828 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 699 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 638 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 558 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 711 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 627 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 618 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 594 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 599 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 573 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 536 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 848 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 632 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 650 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 640 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 528 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 685 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 552 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 630 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 659 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 738 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 572 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 536 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 727 FYMONDT: Apr2007
_FREQ_: 684 FYMONDT: May2007
_FREQ_: 718 FYMONDT: Jun2007
_FREQ_: 552 FYMONDT: Jul2007
_FREQ_: 596 FYMONDT: Aug2007
_FREQ_: 737 FYMONDT: Sep2007
_FREQ_: 629 FYMONDT: Oct2007
_FREQ_: 608 FYMONDT: Nov2007
_FREQ_: 626 FYMONDT: Dec2007
_FREQ_: 599 FYMONDT: Jan2008
_FREQ_: 726 FYMONDT: Feb2008
_FREQ_: 594 FYMONDT: Mar2008
_FREQ_: 688 FYMONDT: Apr2008
_FREQ_: 750 FYMONDT: May2008
_FREQ_: 608 FYMONDT: Jun2008
_FREQ_: 773 FYMONDT: Jul2008
_FREQ_: 706 FYMONDT: Aug2008
_FREQ_: 624 FYMONDT: Sep2008
_FREQ_: 652 FYMONDT: Oct2008
_FREQ_: 636 FYMONDT: Nov2008
_FREQ_: 618 FYMONDT: Dec2008
_FREQ_: 566 FYMONDT: Jan2009
_FREQ_: 641 FYMONDT: Feb2009
_FREQ_: 748 FYMONDT: Mar2009
_FREQ_: 832 FYMONDT: Apr2009
_FREQ_: 782 FYMONDT: May2009
_FREQ_: 624 FYMONDT: Jun2009
_FREQ_: 834 FYMONDT: Jul2009
_FREQ_: 690 FYMONDT: Aug2009
_FREQ_: 628 FYMONDT: Sep2009
_FREQ_: 711 FYMONDT: Oct2009
_FREQ_: 815 FYMONDT: Nov2009
_FREQ_: 617 FYMONDT: Dec2009
_FREQ_: 674 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 863.66666667 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 879 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 898 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 841.5 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 823.66666667 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 767.5 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 742.33333333 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 739.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 701.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 699 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 736.5 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 764.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 813 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 839.16666667 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 883.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 912.5 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 881.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 846.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 799.5 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 775.16666667 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 779.16666667 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 779.83333333 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 794 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 829.16666667 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 859.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 867.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 839.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 834.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 818 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 787.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 767.16666667 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 759.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 755.16666667 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 767.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 781.66666667 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 776.5 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 781 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 743.5 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 726.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 671.5 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 622.66666667 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 600.5 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 575 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 569.66666667 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 564 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 591.16666667 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 634.33333333 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 665.16666667 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 675.66666667 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 682.5 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 704 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 676.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 641.83333333 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 624.33333333 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 617.83333333 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 620.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 591.16666667 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 628 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 630.33333333 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 639.66666667 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 646.5 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 639 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 663.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 614.5 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 614.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 615.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 632 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 639.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 614.5 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 643.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2007
moveave: 652.66666667 FYMONDT: May2007
moveave: 662.5 FYMONDT: Jun2007
moveave: 631.5 FYMONDT: Jul2007
moveave: 635.5 FYMONDT: Aug2007
moveave: 669 FYMONDT: Sep2007
moveave: 652.66666667 FYMONDT: Oct2007
moveave: 640 FYMONDT: Nov2007
moveave: 624.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2007
moveave: 632.5 FYMONDT: Jan2008
moveave: 654.16666667 FYMONDT: Feb2008
moveave: 630.33333333 FYMONDT: Mar2008
moveave: 640.16666667 FYMONDT: Apr2008
moveave: 663.83333333 FYMONDT: May2008
moveave: 660.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2008
moveave: 689.83333333 FYMONDT: Jul2008
moveave: 686.5 FYMONDT: Aug2008
moveave: 691.5 FYMONDT: Sep2008
moveave: 685.5 FYMONDT: Oct2008
moveave: 666.5 FYMONDT: Nov2008
moveave: 668.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2008
moveave: 633.66666667 FYMONDT: Jan2009
moveave: 622.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2009
moveave: 643.5 FYMONDT: Mar2009
moveave: 673.5 FYMONDT: Apr2009
moveave: 697.83333333 FYMONDT: May2009
moveave: 698.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2009
moveave: 743.5 FYMONDT: Jul2009
moveave: 751.66666667 FYMONDT: Aug2009
moveave: 731.66666667 FYMONDT: Sep2009
moveave: 711.5 FYMONDT: Oct2009
moveave: 717 FYMONDT: Nov2009
moveave: 715.83333333 FYMONDT: Dec2009
moveave: 689.16666667
Plot of moveave * FYMONDT

Figure 1: Monthly trends in white collar crime prosecutions

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 2009 was for "Fraud-Identity Theft-Other", accounting for 19 percent of prosecutions. Prosecutions were also filed for "Fraud-Financial Institution" (14.1%), "Fraud-Other " (9.6%), "Fraud-Other Business" (9.3%), "Fraud-Federal Program" (8.2%), "Fraud-Tax" (8%), "Fraud-Health Care" (6.7%), "Fraud-Mortgage" (6.1%), "Fraud-Identity Theft-Aggravated" (5%), "Fraud-Consumer" (2.8%). See Figure 2.

The lead investigative agency for white collar crime prosecutions in December 2009 was FBI accounting for 26 percent of prosecutions referred. Other agencies with substantial numbers of white collar crime referrals were: DHS (19% ), SecServ (16%), Postal (8%), IRS (8%). See Figure 3.

progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 67%  (66.91%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Identity Theft-Other
percentage: 19%  (18.99%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Identity Theft-Other
percentage: 19%  (18.99%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Identity Theft-Other
percentage: 19%  (18.99%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Identity Theft-Other
percentage: 19%  (18.99%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Identity Theft-Other
percentage: 19%  (18.99%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 14%  (14.09%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 14%  (14.09%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 14%  (14.09%)
PIE3D chart of progcatlabel

Figure 2: Specific types of prosecutions
agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 16%  (16.32%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.16%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.15%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 8%  (7.86%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.82%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.82%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.82%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.82%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 26%  (25.82%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 19%  (18.69%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 19%  (18.69%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 19%  (18.69%)
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 2009, 177 defendants in white collar crime cases for these matters were filed in U.S. Magistrate Courts. These courts handle less serious misdemeanor cases, including what are called "petty offenses." In addition, complaints are sometimes filed in the magistrate courts before an indictment or information is entered. In these cases, the matter starts in the magistrate courts and later moves to the district court where subsequent proceedings take place.

In the magistrate courts in December the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1028 involving the "Aggravated identity theft". This was the lead charge for 57.1 percent of all magistrate filings in December.

Other frequently prosecuted lead charges include: "18 USC 1344 - Bank fraud" (10.7%), "18 USC 1029 - Fraud and related activity - access devices" (7.9%), "18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles" (6.8%).

White Collar Crime Prosecutions in U.S. District Courts

In December 2009, 497 defendants in new cases for these matters were charged in the U.S. District Courts. In addition during December there were an additional 40 defendants whose cases moved from the magistrate courts to the U.S. district courts after an indictment or information was filed. The sections which follow cover both sets of cases and therefore cover all matters filed in district court during December.

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 2009.

Lead Charge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
18 USC 1344 - Bank fraud 62 1 1 1 More
18 USC 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television 56 2 5 4 More
18 USC 1349 - Mail Fraud - Attempt and Conspiracy 49 3 8 46 More
18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles 48 4 2 2 More
18 USC 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US 37 5 3 3 More
18 USC 1029 - Fraud and related activity - access devices 32 6 6 5 More
18 USC 641 - Public money, property or records 26 7 7 6 More
18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents 25 8 4 6 More
18 USC 1347 - Health Care Fraud 24 9 9 8 More
26 USC 7206 - Fraud and False statements 19 10 13 12 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 "Fraud by wire, radio, or television" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1343. "Fraud by wire, radio, or television" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1343 was ranked 5 a year ago, while it was the 4 most frequently invoked 5 years ago..

  • Ranked 3rd was "Mail Fraud - Attempt and Conspiracy" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1349. "Mail Fraud - Attempt and Conspiracy" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1349 was ranked 8 a year ago.

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in prosecutions—up 64.7 percent—compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1349 that involves " Mail Fraud - Attempt and Conspiracy ". This was the same statute that had the largest increase—4480 %—when compared with five years ago.

Again among the top ten lead charges, the one showing the sharpest decline in prosecutions compared to one year ago—down 35.3 percent—was Fraud and related activity - id documents (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1028 ). Compared to five years ago, the most significant decline in prosecutions— 28 percent—was for filings where the lead charge was " Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 371 ).

Top Ranked Judicial Districts

In December 2009 the Justice Department said the government brought 215.7 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  
Miss, S 1,463 22 1 8 48 More
Mo, W 1,057 26 2 21 19 More
La, E 947 11 3 29 40 More
Fla, S 885 48 4 1 2 More
Tenn, W 860 11 5 39 22 More
Ala, S 742 5 6 53 73 More
Mo, E 666 16 7 18 9 More
Ala, M 664 6 8 76 91 More
Fla, N 569 8 9 66 76 More
Penn, E 563 26 10 4 4 More

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

  • The Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson)—with 1463 prosecutions as compared with 215.7 prosecutions per ten million population in the United States—was the most active during December 2009. The Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson) was ranked 8 a year ago.

  • The Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) ranked 2nd.

  • Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans) is now ranking 3rd.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis), now ranked 7th , and Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) at 2nd In the same order, these districts ranked 18th and 21st one year ago and 9th and 19th 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— 120 percent—was Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans). Compared to five years ago, the district with the largest growth— 600 percent—was Middle District of Alabama (Montgomery).

In the last year, the judicial District Court recording the largest drop in the rate of white collar crime prosecutions— 27.3 percent—was Southern District of Alabama (Mobile).  But over the past five years, Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) showed the largest drop— 6.9 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 2009 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank  
Smith, Ortrie D. Mo, W 17 1 More
Lee, Tom Stewart Miss, S 12 2 More
Lenard, Joan A. Fla, S 11 3 More
Daniel, Wiley Young Colorado 8 4 More
Hinkle, Robert Lewis Fla, N 7 5 More
Ungaro-Benages, Ursula Mancusi Fla, S 7 5 More
Gaitan, Fernando J. Jr. Mo, W 7 5 More
McCalla, Jon Phipps Tenn, W 6 8 More
Autrey, Henry Edward Mo, E 5 9 More
Arcara, Richard Joseph N. Y., W 5 9 More
McLaughlin, Mary A. Penn, E 5 9 More
Pratter, Gene E.K. Penn, E 5 9 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

A total of 10 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 2 judges were from other districts. (Because of ties, there were a total of 12 judges in the "top ten" rankings.)

  • Judge Ortrie D. Smith in the Western District of Missouri (Kansas City) ranked 1st with 17 defendants in white collar crime cases.

  • Judge Tom Stewart Lee in the Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson) ranked 2nd with 12 defendants in white collar crime cases.

  • Judge Joan A. Lenard in the Southern District of Florida (Miami) ranked 3rd with 11 defendants in white collar crime cases.

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2010, TRAC Reports, Inc.

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