White Collar Crime Prosecutions for March 2007

Number Latest Month 633
Percent Change from previous month 29.4
Percent Change from 1 year ago -7.5
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) -18.7
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) -20.0

Table 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Prosecutions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during March 2007 the government reported 633 new white collar crime prosecutions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is up 29.4% 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 down (-7.5 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 18.7 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.

FYMONDT: Jan2001
_FREQ_: 681 FYMONDT: Feb2001
_FREQ_: 737 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_: 757 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 687 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 633 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 757 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 622 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 724 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 980 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 855 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 921 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 910 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 883 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 902 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 786 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 646 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 640 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 760 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 909 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 886 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 870 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 851 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 807 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 788 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 713 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 812 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 762 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 682 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 727 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 759 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 668 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 963 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 869 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 663 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 711 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 558 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 610 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 654 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 581 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 546 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 559 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 517 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 560 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 779 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 797 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 724 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 650 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 578 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 710 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 634 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 605 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 578 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 596 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 557 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 524 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 816 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 601 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 646 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 631 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 520 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 654 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 539 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 588 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 621 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 564 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 504 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 489 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 633 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 862.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 877 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 895.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 839.16666667 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 821.5 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 765.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 740.5 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 738.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 700.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 696.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 733.83333333 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 761.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 809.83333333 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 835.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 878.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 908.5 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 876.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 841.33333333 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 794.5 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 769.5 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 773.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 771.16666667 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 785.16666667 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 819.33333333 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 847.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 851.83333333 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 819.16666667 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 806.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 788.83333333 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 760.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 747.33333333 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 742.5 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 735 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 760.16666667 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 778 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 774.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 772.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 738.66666667 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 729 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 677.5 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 629.5 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 610 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 584.66666667 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 577.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 569.5 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 590.33333333 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 626.33333333 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 656 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 671.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 681.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 706.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 682.16666667 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 650.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 625.83333333 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 616.83333333 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 613.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 582.33333333 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 612.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 612 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 623.33333333 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 629.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 623 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 644.66666667 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 598.5 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 596.33333333 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 592.16666667 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 581 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 578.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 550.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 566.5
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

• Fraud-Federal Procurement

• Fraud-Federal Program

• Fraud-Tax

• Fraud-Arson for Profit

• Fraud-Other Insurance

• Fraud-Financial Institution

• Fraud-Bankruptcy

• Fraud-Advance Fee Schemes

• Fraud-Other Business

• Fraud-Consumer

• Fraud-Securities

• Fraud-Commodities

• Fraud-Other Investment

• Antitrust-Other

• Fraud-Computer

• Fraud-Health Care

• Fraud-Against Ins. Provider

• Fraud-Insider Ins. Provider

• Fraud-MEWA/MET

• Antitrust-Airlines

• Antitrust-Banking

• Antitrust-Defense Procurement

• Antitrust-Extraterritorial

• Antitrust-Other Finance Mkts.

• Fraud-Telemarketing

• Fraud-Corporate

• Fraud-Other

The largest number of prosecutions of these matters in March 2007 was for "Fraud-Financial Institution", accounting for 21.2 percent of prosecutions. Prosecutions were also filed for "Fraud-Federal Program" (17.5%), "Fraud-Tax" (16.6%) , "Fraud-Other" (11.5%), "Fraud-Other Business" (8.2%), "Fraud-Securities" (6%), "Fraud-Health Care" (5.7%), "Fraud-Consumer" (2.2%), "Fraud-Computer" (2.1%). See Figure 2.

The lead investigative agency for white collar crime prosecutions in March 2007 was FBI accounting for 30 percent of prosecutions referred. Other agencies with substantial numbers of white collar crime referrals were: IRS (19% ), SecServ (15%), Postal (9%), HHS (5%). See Figure 3.

progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 61%  (61.3%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 21%  (21.17%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 21%  (21.17%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 21%  (21.17%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 21%  (21.17%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 21%  (21.17%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (17.54%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (17.54%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 18%  (17.54%)
PIE3D chart of progcatlabel

Figure 2: Specific types of prosecutions
agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.85%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 9%  (8.69%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 23%  (23.06%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 19%  (18.8%) agenrevgrp: HHS
percentage: 5%  (4.74%) agenrevgrp: HHS
percentage: 5%  (4.74%) agenrevgrp: HHS
percentage: 5%  (4.74%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 30%  (29.86%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 30%  (29.86%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 30%  (29.86%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 30%  (29.86%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 30%  (29.86%)
PIE3D chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 3: Prosecutions by Investigative Agency

White Collar Crime Prosecutions in U.S. Magistrate Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

In March 2007, 13 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 March the most frequently cited lead charge was Title 18 U.S.C Section 1344 involving the "Bank fraud". This was the lead charge for 22 percent of all magistrate filings in March.

Other frequently prosecuted lead charges include: "18 USC 1029 - Fraud and related activity - access devices" (11%), "18 USC 1349 - Mail Fraud - Attempt and Conspiracy" (9.8%), "18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles" (6.1%), " 18 USC 1347 - Health Care Fraud" (6.1%).

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 March 2007.

Lead Charge Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
18 USC 1344 - Bank fraud 65 1 1 1 More
18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles 60 2 2 2 More
18 USC 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US 44 3 4 3 More
18 USC 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television 35 4 3 5 More
26 USC 7206 - Fraud and False statements 29 5 13 12 More
18 USC 287 - False, fictitious or fraudulent claims 24 6 7 13 More
18 USC 641 - Public money, property or records 22 7 9 7 More
18 USC 1001 - Fraud/false statements or entries generally 21 8 10 9 More
15 :0078j 17 9 - - More
18 USC 513 - Securities of the States and private entities 17 9 15 15 More

Table 2: Top charges filed

  • "Bank fraud" (18 U.S.C Section 1344) was the most frequent recorded lead charge. This statute was also ranked 1st a year ago as well as five years ago.

  • Ranked 2nd in frequency was the lead charge "Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1341. This statute was also ranked 2nd a year ago as well as five years ago.

  • Ranked 3rd was "Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 371. This statute was ranked 4th a year ago, while it was the 3rd most frequently invoked 5 years ago.

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in prosecutions—up 31.4 percent—compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 513 that involves " Securities of the States and private entities ". Compared to five years ago, the largest increase—52.7 percent—was registered for prosecutions under " False, fictitious or fraudulent claims " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 287 ).

Again among the top ten lead charges, the one showing the sharpest decline in prosecutions compared to one year ago—down 21.5 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— 44.9 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 March 2007 the Justice Department said the government brought 225.2 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  
La, M 1,317 8 1 21 70 More
Ill, S 943 10 2 59 83 More
Virg, W 936 16 3 86 62 More
W Virg, N 684 5 4 65 - More
Nevada 668 13 5 28 29 More
Miss, S 661 10 6 19 53 More
S Car 600 21 7 4 8 More
R. I. 555 5 8 78 80 More
Tenn, W 549 7 9 19 11 More
Ohio, N 548 27 10 5 7 More

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

  • Middle District of Louisiana (Baton Rouge)—with 1317 prosecutions as compared with 225.2 prosecutions per ten million population in the United States—was the most active during March 2007. The district's position last year was 21st. Five years ago, the district's position was 70.

  • Southern District of Illinois (East St. Louis) ranked 2nd. This marked a rise from Illinois South's 59thplace ranking just one year ago. Five years ago, the district's position was 83.

  • Western District of Virginia (Roanoke) is now ranking 3rd. It moved up in its rankings from a year ago when it ranked 86th. Five years ago, the district's position was 62.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson), now ranked 6th , and Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) at 9th In the same order, these districts ranked 19th and 19th one year ago and 53rd and 11th 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— 483.3 percent—was Western District of Virginia (Roanoke). Compared to five years ago, the district with the largest growth— 276.9 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— 37.5 percent—was Northern District of West Virginia (Wheeling).  But over the past five years, Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) showed the largest drop— 47 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 March 2007 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank  
Montgomery, Ann D. Minnesota 14 1 More
Reagan, Michael Joseph Ill, S 9 2 More
Takasugi, Robert Mitsuhiro Cal, C 6 3 More
Fogel, Jeremy D. Cal, N 5 4 More
Campbell, David G. Arizona 4 5 More
Parker, John Victor La, M 4 5 More
Boyle, Terrence William N Car, E 4 5 More
Hicks, Larry R. Nevada 4 5 More
Karlton, Lawrence K. Cal, E 3 9 More
Chatigny, Robert N. Conn 3 9 More
Kessler, Gladys D. C. 3 9 More
Moreno, Federico A. Fla, S 3 9 More
Seitz, Patricia A. Fla, S 3 9 More
Lawson, Hugh Ga, M 3 9 More
Lodge, Edward J. Idaho 3 9 More
Gettleman, Robert William Ill, N 3 9 More
Fallon, Eldon E. La, E 3 9 More
Hicks, S. Maurice Jr. La, W 3 9 More
Bell, Robert Holmes Mich, W 3 9 More
Ericksen, Joan N. Minnesota 3 9 More
Stohr, Donald J. Mo, E 3 9 More
Hayden, Katharine Sweeney N. J. 3 9 More
Jones, Robert Clive Nevada 3 9 More
Mahan, James C. Nevada 3 9 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

A total of 5 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 19 judges were from other districts. (Because of ties, there were a total of 24 judges in the "top ten" rankings.)

  • Judge Ann D. Montgomery in the District of Minnesota ranked 1st with 14 defendants in white collar crime cases.

  • Judge Michael Joseph Reagan in the Southern District of Illinois (East St. Louis) ranked 2nd with 9 defendants in white collar crime cases.

  • Judge Robert Mitsuhiro Takasugi in the Central District of California (Los Angeles) ranked 3rd with 6 new white collar crime cases.

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2007, TRAC Reports, Inc.

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