White Collar Crime Convictions for March 2007

Number Latest Month 674
Percent Change from previous month 10.7
Percent Change from 1 year ago -0.8
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Including Magistrate Court) -9.4
Percent Change from 5 years ago (Excluding Magistrate Court) -8.8

Table 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Convictions

The latest available data from the Justice Department show that during March 2007 the government reported 674 new white collar crime convictions. According to the case-by-case information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), this number is up 10.7% 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 convicted for 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 convictions of this type are compared with those of the same period in the previous year, the number of convictions was only slightlydown (-0.8 percent). Convictions over the past year are still much lower than they were five years ago. Overall, the data show that convictions of this type are down 9.4 percent from levels reported in 2002.

The decrease from the levels five years ago in white collar crime convictions for these matters is shown more clearly in Figure 1. The vertical bars in Figure 1 represent the number of white collar crime convictions 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_: 695 FYMONDT: Feb2001
_FREQ_: 619 FYMONDT: Mar2001
_FREQ_: 743 FYMONDT: Apr2001
_FREQ_: 570 FYMONDT: May2001
_FREQ_: 651 FYMONDT: Jun2001
_FREQ_: 584 FYMONDT: Jul2001
_FREQ_: 539 FYMONDT: Aug2001
_FREQ_: 627 FYMONDT: Sep2001
_FREQ_: 701 FYMONDT: Oct2001
_FREQ_: 746 FYMONDT: Nov2001
_FREQ_: 634 FYMONDT: Dec2001
_FREQ_: 507 FYMONDT: Jan2002
_FREQ_: 730 FYMONDT: Feb2002
_FREQ_: 563 FYMONDT: Mar2002
_FREQ_: 684 FYMONDT: Apr2002
_FREQ_: 651 FYMONDT: May2002
_FREQ_: 716 FYMONDT: Jun2002
_FREQ_: 646 FYMONDT: Jul2002
_FREQ_: 622 FYMONDT: Aug2002
_FREQ_: 695 FYMONDT: Sep2002
_FREQ_: 635 FYMONDT: Oct2002
_FREQ_: 695 FYMONDT: Nov2002
_FREQ_: 563 FYMONDT: Dec2002
_FREQ_: 583 FYMONDT: Jan2003
_FREQ_: 609 FYMONDT: Feb2003
_FREQ_: 694 FYMONDT: Mar2003
_FREQ_: 761 FYMONDT: Apr2003
_FREQ_: 696 FYMONDT: May2003
_FREQ_: 544 FYMONDT: Jun2003
_FREQ_: 507 FYMONDT: Jul2003
_FREQ_: 629 FYMONDT: Aug2003
_FREQ_: 537 FYMONDT: Sep2003
_FREQ_: 670 FYMONDT: Oct2003
_FREQ_: 628 FYMONDT: Nov2003
_FREQ_: 548 FYMONDT: Dec2003
_FREQ_: 538 FYMONDT: Jan2004
_FREQ_: 609 FYMONDT: Feb2004
_FREQ_: 719 FYMONDT: Mar2004
_FREQ_: 725 FYMONDT: Apr2004
_FREQ_: 660 FYMONDT: May2004
_FREQ_: 553 FYMONDT: Jun2004
_FREQ_: 714 FYMONDT: Jul2004
_FREQ_: 561 FYMONDT: Aug2004
_FREQ_: 602 FYMONDT: Sep2004
_FREQ_: 653 FYMONDT: Oct2004
_FREQ_: 431 FYMONDT: Nov2004
_FREQ_: 439 FYMONDT: Dec2004
_FREQ_: 460 FYMONDT: Jan2005
_FREQ_: 498 FYMONDT: Feb2005
_FREQ_: 587 FYMONDT: Mar2005
_FREQ_: 751 FYMONDT: Apr2005
_FREQ_: 552 FYMONDT: May2005
_FREQ_: 580 FYMONDT: Jun2005
_FREQ_: 674 FYMONDT: Jul2005
_FREQ_: 614 FYMONDT: Aug2005
_FREQ_: 665 FYMONDT: Sep2005
_FREQ_: 741 FYMONDT: Oct2005
_FREQ_: 601 FYMONDT: Nov2005
_FREQ_: 517 FYMONDT: Dec2005
_FREQ_: 516 FYMONDT: Jan2006
_FREQ_: 605 FYMONDT: Feb2006
_FREQ_: 612 FYMONDT: Mar2006
_FREQ_: 679 FYMONDT: Apr2006
_FREQ_: 494 FYMONDT: May2006
_FREQ_: 597 FYMONDT: Jun2006
_FREQ_: 615 FYMONDT: Jul2006
_FREQ_: 521 FYMONDT: Aug2006
_FREQ_: 673 FYMONDT: Sep2006
_FREQ_: 701 FYMONDT: Oct2006
_FREQ_: 610 FYMONDT: Nov2006
_FREQ_: 516 FYMONDT: Dec2006
_FREQ_: 528 FYMONDT: Jan2007
_FREQ_: 565 FYMONDT: Feb2007
_FREQ_: 609 FYMONDT: Mar2007
_FREQ_: 674 FYMONDT: Jun2001
moveave: 643.66666667 FYMONDT: Jul2001
moveave: 617.66666667 FYMONDT: Aug2001
moveave: 619 FYMONDT: Sep2001
moveave: 612 FYMONDT: Oct2001
moveave: 641.33333333 FYMONDT: Nov2001
moveave: 638.5 FYMONDT: Dec2001
moveave: 625.66666667 FYMONDT: Jan2002
moveave: 657.5 FYMONDT: Feb2002
moveave: 646.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2002
moveave: 644 FYMONDT: Apr2002
moveave: 628.16666667 FYMONDT: May2002
moveave: 641.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2002
moveave: 665 FYMONDT: Jul2002
moveave: 647 FYMONDT: Aug2002
moveave: 669 FYMONDT: Sep2002
moveave: 660.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2002
moveave: 668.16666667 FYMONDT: Nov2002
moveave: 642.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2002
moveave: 632.16666667 FYMONDT: Jan2003
moveave: 630 FYMONDT: Feb2003
moveave: 629.83333333 FYMONDT: Mar2003
moveave: 650.83333333 FYMONDT: Apr2003
moveave: 651 FYMONDT: May2003
moveave: 647.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2003
moveave: 635.16666667 FYMONDT: Jul2003
moveave: 638.5 FYMONDT: Aug2003
moveave: 612.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2003
moveave: 597.16666667 FYMONDT: Oct2003
moveave: 585.83333333 FYMONDT: Nov2003
moveave: 586.5 FYMONDT: Dec2003
moveave: 591.66666667 FYMONDT: Jan2004
moveave: 588.33333333 FYMONDT: Feb2004
moveave: 618.66666667 FYMONDT: Mar2004
moveave: 627.83333333 FYMONDT: Apr2004
moveave: 633.16666667 FYMONDT: May2004
moveave: 634 FYMONDT: Jun2004
moveave: 663.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2004
moveave: 655.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2004
moveave: 635.83333333 FYMONDT: Sep2004
moveave: 623.83333333 FYMONDT: Oct2004
moveave: 585.66666667 FYMONDT: Nov2004
moveave: 566.66666667 FYMONDT: Dec2004
moveave: 524.33333333 FYMONDT: Jan2005
moveave: 513.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2005
moveave: 511.33333333 FYMONDT: Mar2005
moveave: 527.66666667 FYMONDT: Apr2005
moveave: 547.83333333 FYMONDT: May2005
moveave: 571.33333333 FYMONDT: Jun2005
moveave: 607 FYMONDT: Jul2005
moveave: 626.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2005
moveave: 639.33333333 FYMONDT: Sep2005
moveave: 637.66666667 FYMONDT: Oct2005
moveave: 645.83333333 FYMONDT: Nov2005
moveave: 635.33333333 FYMONDT: Dec2005
moveave: 609 FYMONDT: Jan2006
moveave: 607.5 FYMONDT: Feb2006
moveave: 598.66666667 FYMONDT: Mar2006
moveave: 588.33333333 FYMONDT: Apr2006
moveave: 570.5 FYMONDT: May2006
moveave: 583.83333333 FYMONDT: Jun2006
moveave: 600.33333333 FYMONDT: Jul2006
moveave: 586.33333333 FYMONDT: Aug2006
moveave: 596.5 FYMONDT: Sep2006
moveave: 600.16666667 FYMONDT: Oct2006
moveave: 619.5 FYMONDT: Nov2006
moveave: 606 FYMONDT: Dec2006
moveave: 591.5 FYMONDT: Jan2007
moveave: 598.83333333 FYMONDT: Feb2007
moveave: 588.16666667 FYMONDT: Mar2007
moveave: 583.66666667
Plot of moveave * FYMONDT

Figure 1: Criminal White Collar Crime Convictions 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 convictions of these matters in March 2007 was for "Fraud-Financial Institution", accounting for 23.9 percent of convictions. Convictions were also filed for "Fraud-Federal Program" (13.5%), "Fraud-Other" (13.4%) , "Fraud-Other Business" (12%), "Fraud-Tax" (8.5%), "Fraud-Health Care" (7%), "Fraud-Computer" (5.2%), "Fraud-Corporate" (3.4%), "Fraud-Consumer" (2.5%), "Fraud-Bankruptcy" (2.1%). See Figure 2.

The lead investigative agency for white collar crime convictions in March 2007 was FBI accounting for 42 percent of convictions. Other agencies with substantial numbers of white collar crime convictions were: SecServ (15% ), IRS (10%), Postal (8%), DHS (5%). See Figure 3.

progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Other
percentage: 63%  (62.61%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.89%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.89%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.89%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.89%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Financial Institution
percentage: 24%  (23.89%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 14%  (13.5%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 14%  (13.5%) progcatlabel: Fraud-Federal Program
percentage: 14%  (13.5%)
PIE3D chart of progcatlabel

Figure 2: Specific types of convictions
agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: SecServ
percentage: 15%  (14.99%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Postal
percentage: 8%  (8.01%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: Other
percentage: 20%  (20.03%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: IRS
percentage: 10%  (10.09%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 42%  (42.14%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 42%  (42.14%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 42%  (42.14%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 42%  (42.14%) agenrevgrp: FBI
percentage: 42%  (42.14%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 5%  (4.75%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 5%  (4.75%) agenrevgrp: DHS
percentage: 5%  (4.75%)
PIE3D chart of agenrevgrp

Figure 3: Convictions by Investigative Agency

White Collar Crime Convictions in U.S. Magistrate Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

In March 2007, 1 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 1030 involving the "Fraud and related activity - computers". This was the lead charge for 33.3 percent of all magistrate convictions in March.

White Collar Crime Convictions in U.S. District Courts

Top Ranked Lead Charges

Table 2 shows the top lead charges recorded in the convictions 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 100 1 1 1 More
18 USC 1341 - Mail Fraud - Frauds and swindles 92 2 2 2 More
18 USC 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television 48 3 4 6 More
18 USC 1029 - Fraud and related activity - access devices 43 4 5 4 More
18 USC 1028 - Fraud and related activity - id documents 36 5 7 12 More
18 USC 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud US 34 6 3 3 More
18 USC 1001 - Fraud/false statements or entries generally 26 7 10 11 More
18 USC 641 - Public money, property or records 24 8 11 7 More
18 USC 1347 - Health Care Fraud 23 9 6 10 More
26 USC 7201 - Attempt to evade or defeat tax 21 10 12 9 More

Table 2: Top charges for convictions

  • "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 "Fraud by wire, radio, or television" under Title 18 U.S.C Section 1343. This statute was ranked 4th a year ago, while it was the 6th most frequently invoked 5 years ago.

Among these top ten lead charges, the one showing the greatest increase in convictions—up 50 percent—compared to one year ago was Title 18 U.S.C Section 641 that involves " Public money, property or records ". Compared to five years ago, the largest increase—94 percent—was registered for convictions 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 convictions compared to one year ago—down 36.7 percent—was Health Care Fraud (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1347 ). Compared to five years ago, the most significant decline in convictions— 26.3 percent—was for convictions where the lead charge was " Bank fraud " (Title 18 U.S.C Section 1344 ).

Top Ranked Judicial Districts

In March 2007 the Justice Department said the government obtained 273 white collar crime convictions for every ten million people in the United States.

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

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


Judicial District Percapita Count Rank 1yr ago 5yrs ago  
Mo, E 1,133 27 1 15 22 More
Tenn, W 942 12 2 19 25 More
Miss, S 860 13 3 34 36 More
Fla, S 768 41 4 2 4 More
Nevada 720 14 5 28 28 More
Ken, W 695 12 6 63 54 More
Ga, S 694 8 7 84 83 More
Ark, E 543 7 8 47 24 More
Ken, E 463 8 9 55 67 More
Iowa, N 457 5 10 67 67 More

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

  • Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis)—with 1133 convictions as compared with 273 convictions per ten million population in the United States—was the most active during March 2007. The district's position last year was 15th. Five years ago, the district's position was 22.

  • Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) ranked 2nd. This marked a rise from Tennessee West's 19thplace ranking just one year ago. Five years ago, the district's position was 25.

  • Southern District of Mississippi (Jackson) is now ranking 3rd. It moved up in its rankings from a year ago when it ranked 34th. Five years ago, the district's position was 36.

Recent entrants to the top 10 list were Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis), now ranked 1st , and Western District of Tennessee (Memphis) at 2nd In the same order, these districts ranked 15th and 19th one year ago and 22nd and 25th five years ago.

The federal judicial district which showed the greatest growth in the rate of white collar crime convictions compared to one year ago— 312.5 percent—was Southern District of Georgia (Savannah). This was the same district that had the largest increase— 312.5 %—when compared with five years ago.

In the last year, the judicial District Court recording the largest drop in the rate of white collar crime convictions— 50 percent—was Northern District of Iowa (Cedar Rapids).  But over the past five years, Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock) showed the largest drop— 63.3 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 resulting in convictions of this type during March 2007 are shown in Table 4.

Judge Count Rank  
Cooke, Marcia G. Fla, S 10 1 More
Carter, David O. Cal, C 9 2 More
Limbaugh, Stephen Nathaniel Mo, E 8 3 More
Bowen, Dudley Hollingsworth Jr Ga, S 7 4 More
Starrett, Keith Miss, S 7 4 More
Jones, Robert Clive Nevada 7 4 More
Anderson, Percy Cal, C 6 7 More
Martone, Frederick J. Arizona 5 8 More
Dimitrouleas, William P. Fla, S 5 8 More
Martinez, Jose E. Fla, S 5 8 More
Duffey, William S. Jr. Ga, N 5 8 More
Frank, Donovan W. Minnesota 5 8 More
Perry, Catherine D. Mo, E 5 8 More
Voorhees, Richard Lesley N Car, W 5 8 More
Herlong, Henry Michael Jr. S Car 5 8 More
Schneider, Michael H. Sr. Texas, E 5 8 More

Table 4: Top 10 judges

A total of 8 out of the "top ten" judges were in districts which were in the top ten with the largest number of white collar crime convictions per capita, while the remaining 8 judges were from other districts. (Because of ties, there were a total of 16 judges in the "top ten" rankings.)

  • Judge Marcia G. Cooke in the Southern District of Florida (Miami) ranked 1st with 10 convicted in white collar crime convictions.

  • Judge David O. Carter in the Central District of California (Los Angeles) ranked 2nd with 9 convicted in white collar crime convictions.

  • Judge Stephen Nathaniel Limbaugh in the Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis) ranked 3rd with 8 new white collar crime convictions.

TRAC Copyright
Copyright 2007, TRAC Reports, Inc.

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