I. What charges can the government use to allege money laundering?

18 U.S.C. § 1956: This is for laundering monetary instruments and carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $500,000 or twice the value of the funds involved, whichever is greater

18 U.S.C. § 1957: This applies to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity and can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines up to twice the value of the property involved.

18 U.S.C. § 1956(h): criminalizes conspiracy to commit money laundering. It makes it illegal for two or more people to agree to conduct or attempt to conduct a financial transaction involving the proceeds of specified unlawful activity (money laundering). The crime is the agreement itself, regardless of whether the money laundering was ultimately successful.

Bulk cash smuggling (31 U.S.C. § 5332): knowingly concealing more than $10,000 in currency or other monetary instruments on the person of such individual or in any conveyance, article of luggage, merchandise, or other container, and transports or transfers or attempts to transport or transfer such currency or monetary instruments from a place within the United States to a place outside of the United States, or from a place outside the United States to a place within the United States

RICO Act- the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)

II. Drug traffickers are purported to utilize some of the following tactics to money launder

-Purchase and or title assets in fictitious names, aliases, or in the names of friends or relatives

-Create and maintain Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency accounts. These are utilized because of the anonymity associated with the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency accounts and because cryptocurrency is decentralized.

III. Dark Net Explanation

The darknet is a part of the internet that requires special software, like the Tor browser, to access, and is not indexed by standard search engines. It uses layered encryption to make user activity anonymous

IV. Cryptocurrency

This is a type of virtual currency, that is a decentralized, peer to peer network based medium of value or exchange that may be used as a substitute for fiat to buy goods or services or exchanged for fiat currency or other cryptocurrencies. Examples of cryptocurrency are Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Monero, among others.

Most cryptocurrencies have a blockchain which is a distributed public ledger, run by the decentralized network, containing an immutable and historical record of every transaction. It is still difficult for a number of reasons for law enforcement to track.

Cryptocurrency is stored in a virtual account called a wallet. Crypto wallets are designed to store your private key, keeping your crypto accessible at all times. They also allow you to send, receive, and spend cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum. Crypto wallets keep your private keys – the passwords that give you access to your cryptocurrencies – protected and accessible, allowing you to send and receive cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) has issued many notices discussing the various issues with cryptocurrency including recent concerns over regulatory risks related to convertible virtual currency kiosks. This notice dates back to 2019! It’s worth a read as it describes dark net marketplaces and cryptocurrency really well.

V. Recent cases in the news

The recent “Fire bunny” case was a case that operated on the darknet from January 2019 to August 2022. It operated on multiple dark web marketplaces and described itself as an “old vendor with the best in QUALITY SPEED OF DELIVERY and STEALTH.” In total, the defendants allegedly received nearly $8 million in Bitcoin proceeds and investigators found nearly $900,00 worth of cryptocurrency on one of the defendant’s phone. Some of the money received was laundered by converting Monero – a form of anonymized cryptocurrency that is extremely difficult to trace or monitor – into Bitcoin. The Bitcoin would then enter cryptocurrency exchange accounts controlled by the defendants and others. At least $2.4 million in Bitcoin was sent to a foreign based cryptocurrency exchange and laundered in the form of Chinese Yuan.

Samourai CEO Keonne Rodriguez and Samourai CTO William Lonergan Hill were recently sentenced for knowingly transmitting over $237 million in alleged criminal proceeds, coming from, among other things, drug trafficking, darknet marketplaces, cyber-intrusions, frauds, sanctioned jurisdictions, murder-for-hire schemes, and a child pornography (“CSAM”) website.

It utilized a Bitcoin mixing service known as “Whirlpool,” and coordinated batches of Bitcoin exchanges between groups of Samourai users. Through this process, the original source of particular Bitcoin holdings became obscured within the blockchain’s transactional record, effectively preventing law enforcement agencies and cryptocurrency exchanges from tracing funds back to their origins.

The second service, called “Ricochet,” enabled users to introduce additional and unnecessary intermediate transactions—known as “hops”—between sending and receiving addresses. This feature served a similar obfuscation purpose, making it substantially more difficult for monitoring entities to establish connections between cryptocurrency transfers and potential illicit activities. The scale of these operations was considerable: from Ricochet’s launch in 2017 and Whirlpool’s inception in 2019, more than 80,000 Bitcoin—valued at over $2 billion at the time—passed through these services. Samourai collected fees for both services, estimated to have a total value of more than $6 million.

Finally, in Operation RapTor, participating law enforcement agencies in the U.S., Europe, South America, and Asia arrested 270 darknet vendors, buyers, and administrators. Recently, as part of that large takedown, in the Southern District of New York (which is a district we are licensed to practice in) Incognito Market owner Rui-Siang Lin pled guilty for operating an online narcotics bazaar that existed on the dark web. It is alleged that Incognito Market sold more than $100 million of narcotics to anyone using the Tor web browser on the “dark web” or “darknet.”

Conaway & Strickler, PC is licensed to practice in NY, GA and CA. We can “pro hac” into any federal district in the country and have represented clients in New Hampshire, Vermont, Georgia, New Jersey, New York, California, Iowa, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, Pennsylvania, among others. We have “first chaired” many jury trials and have represented clients charged with RICO, drug trafficking and cryptocurrency money laundering cases. Please contact us for additional information or if you have a case you want to discuss with us. Please see here for additional blogs on this subject.

DME Fraud

Durable Medical Equipment (DME) fraud remains a cornerstone of federal enforcement as seen in the recent takedown. An indictment in the Western District of New York charges a medical doctor with billing roughly $29.6 million for fictious DME and $5.6 million for audio-only telehealth visits, which were brief or never occurred. That doctor produced and maintained false and fictitious medical records and fraudulently certified orders for braces without regard to medical necessity. The doctor now faces federal criminal charges of conspiracy to commit health care fraud, health care fraud, and false statements relating to health care matters.

In “Operation Gold Rush,” prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York indicted 11 defendants, including two pharmacists, members of a transnational criminal organization based in Russia and Eastern Europe. These individuals allegedly orchestrated a massive Medicare fraud and money-laundering scheme that billed over $10.6 billion to federal health programs—making it the largest case by loss amount ever charged by the DOJ. The group used foreign straw owners to acquire dozens of U.S.-based DME suppliers, then submitted fraudulent claims for equipment such as urinary catheters and glucose monitors that never delivered, exploiting stolen identities and confidential patient data. To date, 19 defendants have been charged in the case, including multiple arrests abroad (Estonia) and at U.S. entry points.

COVID-19 Testing Kickbacks

COVID-19 testing kickback schemes typically involve health care providers or marketers billing Medicare for over-the-counter or lab-based COVID-19 tests that were unnecessary, never provided, or obtained through illicit referrals. These cases often rely on the same core tactics as DME fraud: using stolen or misused patient information, paying illegal kickbacks for referrals, and submitting inflated or false claims to federal programs. In both types of fraud, the perpetrators exploit gaps in oversight during high-demand periods—such as the pandemic or public health emergencies—to rapidly bill large amounts to Medicare, often with little or no patient interaction or verification.

These 2025 takedown includes criminal indictments and civil settlement agreements targeting this type of COVID-19 fraud. An indictment out of Illinois charged multiple individuals, including a physician, for their roles in a kickback scheme. According to the indictment, the defendants caused laboratories in Illinois and Texas to submit fraudulent claims to the HRSA COVID-19 Uninsured Program, ultimately receiving over $293 million in payments. The physician involved allegedly misused patient information—including data from a former hospital employer—to falsely claim that uninsured individuals had submitted samples for COVID-19 testing. In reality, many of the patients had not submitted samples at all. Defendants submitted claims through Texas labs they owned, despite those labs being non-operational. The proceeds were then laundered through various financial accounts to disguise the funds’ origin. Charges include wire fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, HIPAA violations, and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Authorities have seized a Rolls Royce Phantom and more than $104 million in assets linked to the fraud.

The charges being brought by the federal government in these cases carry significant criminal penalties and collateral consequences, especially for licensed medical professionals. At Conaway & Strickler, we are highly experienced in defending against these types of claims. Contact us to schedule a consultation and discuss your case.

Crypto money laundering follows the same pattern used for fiat (government-issued) currencies by “cleaning” funds gained through illicit means, before exchanging or withdrawing them for cash. Traditionally, money laundering involves disguising financial assets so they can be used without detection of the illegal activity that produced them. In the context of crypto, tokens are moved through various digital addresses to obscure their illegal origin and make them more difficult to trace.  

The privacy-preserving nature of crypto has opened the door for criminals to conceal the origin of illicitly gained funds through a variety of methods. Cybercriminals ultimately funnel assets through several businesses and online addresses to hide the money trail before transferring the funds to a seemingly legitimate source. 

There are several methods that criminals will use when engaging in cryptocurrency money laundering, including: 

• Smurfing: Splitting up large sums of money into smaller amounts so they can be sent via multiple transactions.  
• Exchange Hopping: Using multiple cryptocurrency exchanges to transfer funds across several platforms and obscure the money trail.  
• Crypto Swaps: Using multiple cryptocurrency wallet addresses to directly convert funds without an intermediary or a centralized exchange. 
• Offshore Transactions: Creating offshore accounts to hide the origin of funds. 
• Mixing: Blending together the crypto assets of multiple users, making it difficult to determine who owns what.   
• Gambling Platforms: Depositing tokens into online gambling websites to be either withdrawn as cash or used to place coordinated bets.  

Cybercriminals require other actors (individuals and sometimes shell companies) to facilitate this crypto money laundering. Like traditional money laundering, criminals recruit “money mules” to move or launder the illicit funds, often unknowingly. In the context of crypto, this is often done under the guise of a cryptocurrency investment scheme.  

Just as traditional money laundering can be federally prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 1956, crypto money laundering is a crime under that same law. In addition to money laundering charges, involvement in a cryptocurrency scam can lead to charges including conspiracy, wire fraud, mail fraud, and more. Further, individuals at all levels of these schemes can face prosecution, including those who may have unwittingly played the role of a money mule. 

With decades of experience in defending traditional financial fraud paired with a deep understanding of the newer world of cryptocurrency, our firm possesses the skills and expertise to assist those accused of crypto fraud. Contact us for a free consultation.  

Kousisis comes before the Court after a Philadelphia-area government contractor was found guilty of fraud after it failed to comply with a contract provision intended to promote diversity. Stamatios Kousisis and Alpha Painting and Construction Co., Inc. (Alpha) secured two substantial contracts with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). These contracts mandated a certain percentage of work to be allocated to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs). Kousisis and his company misrepresented their compliance with this requirement by using a DBE as a mere pass-through entity, thereby falsely claiming adherence to the DBE participation goals. Despite this deception, the contracted work was completed to PennDOT’s satisfaction, and no direct financial loss was incurred by the department.

Federal prosecutors charged Kousisis and Alpha with wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and making false statements. The prosecution’s argument was based on the “fraudulent inducement” theory, suggesting that the defendants obtained the contracts through deceptive promises, even though PennDOT did not suffer a financial loss. Ultimately, Kousisis was sentenced to 70 months’ imprisonment for the multi-million dollar fraud he perpetrated following a jury trial in 2018.

However, the defense has argued that for a fraud conviction, there must be an intent to cause economic harm, which they claim was absent in this case. During oral arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson posed the question, “Why isn’t this a classic scheme to obtain property under false pretenses?” For years in federal white-collar cases, the “scheme” itself has always been recognized as the “harm” that triggers application of the federal fraud statutes. Despite that precedent, defense argued: “If there’s no harm that occurs in those transactions, there is no fraud.”

It seems that conservative justices were receptive to the defendant’s argument. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested that “such crimes were better handled by state prosecutors.” Justice Samuel Alito expressed that “the court really doesn’t like the federalization of white-collar prosecutions and wants that to be done in state court and is really hostile to this whole enterprise.”

The outcome of Kousisis v. United States holds the potential to redefine the scope of federal white-collar prosecutions. A decision favoring the defendants could lead to a substantial shift in prosecutorial responsibilities from federal to state authorities. A ruling that limits federal jurisdiction in such cases would compel companies to adapt by focusing more on state-level compliance and legal frameworks. Engaging with experienced legal counsel will be essential for businesses to remain compliant and mitigate risks in this evolving legal landscape.

What Is the New FINCEN Rule?

FINCEN’s new rule extends Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) obligations to investment advisers involved in residential real estate transactions. The aim is to prevent illicit financial activities in an industry known for large cash transactions that can serve as vehicles for money laundering, fraud, and other financial crimes.

Previously, residential real estate investments, particularly those conducted through shell companies or trusts, offered a level of anonymity that bad actors could exploit. This new rule eliminates some of that opacity by requiring reporting and disclosure obligations for entities and individuals involved in these transactions.

The final rule imposes several key requirements:

1. Increased Reporting and Disclosure: Individuals and firms engaged in residential real estate investments must now report detailed information regarding the identity of buyers and sellers, the source of funds, and other financial details. This includes both U.S. and foreign investors, adding an extra layer of scrutiny for cross-border transactions.
2. Enhanced Due Diligence: Investment advisers and firms must now conduct thorough due diligence on clients and the source of their funds, ensuring that they comply with AML/CFT standards. This may involve verifying identities, examining financial records, and reporting suspicious activities to FINCEN.
3. Penalties for Non-Compliance: The rule includes penalties for individuals and firms that fail to meet the new AML/CFT obligations. Non-compliance could lead to fines, sanctions, or even criminal charges depending on the severity of the infraction.

For real estate investors, the new FINCEN rule adds a new layer of legal and financial oversight. While the intention is to weed out bad actors, the burden of proof is now on investors and their advisers to ensure compliance. This means that investors will need to be more transparent in their transactions, particularly regarding the source of their funds. Without proof of the funds coming from a legitimate source, criminal charges of money laundering and fraud can result.

As the FINCEN rule takes effect, compliance will be a critical concern for many in the real estate industry. Our firm is experienced in navigating the complex landscape of financial regulations, including defending clients against charges of money laundering and related financial crimes. We can help you understand your obligations under the new FINCEN rule and defend against any accusations of non-compliance or criminal misconduct.

This new regulation represents a major shift for the residential real estate industry. Whether you’re an investor or an adviser, staying compliant is no longer optional—it’s the law. The new FINCEN rule is set to take effect on December 1, 2025. If you have questions about the new rule and how it affects your business, contact ustoday for a consultation.

What reports are generated from my devices?

Cellebrite reports provide information about phone calls and text messages; but now it also provides a report on the data stored on these devices such as voicemails, images, and browsing history. From GPS location data to social media activity, cell phones can provide a treasure trove for law enforcement agencies to use to build their cases.

What protections do I have to prevent law enforcement from searching my devices?

Laws on the admission and use of this evidence in court are still evolving. In the Georgia Supreme Court case State v. Wilson, the court ruled search warrants for cell phone contents must specify the items being sought. This is to prevent a general search of a person’s belongings, which is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.

Do I have the same legal rights at the border that I would elsewhere in the United States?

The Supreme Court ruled that the police must get a warrant before searching someone’s cell phone in Riley v. California. The Supreme Court held that a warrant is generally required before a search of a cell phone seized incident to arrest. BUT, at the border, there is less protection. According to US Customs and Border Protection a person may be chosen for inspection for many different random reasons and thus there is less protections when crossing the border in or out of the US. What this means – you can be pulled for a secondary inspection and all of your devices can be searched without a warrant. They can also get an image from the hard drive of these devices and / or seize the devices at the border.

What do I do if I am asked to give my cell phone to law enforcement?

If you know your rights, you can comply when necessary. So, for example, if you are traveling internationally – do not travel with devices that you would not want searched. Furthermore, if you are driving and pulled over with drugs or a high amount of currency in your car, etc, your cell phone and / or other devices WILL be seized and analyzed.

And, please remember anything uploaded to the cloud is fair game for law enforcement. That’s a broad statement – but when you signed up for Instagram, Whats App, Google, TikTok, Facebook, Signal, Twitter/X, etc, you signed away any privacy rights. Those companies are fast to comply with law enforcement subpoenas giving whatever you posted/uploaded immediately to them.

What is a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)?

A Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is a document that financial institutions are legally required to file with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) when they detect potentially suspicious behavior involving financial transactions. Once filed, these reports are sent to FinCEN, a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, which shares the information with law enforcement agencies for further investigation if necessary.

Why Do Banks File SARs?

Banks must comply with a variety of regulations designed to prevent financial crimes. One of the core elements of these regulations is monitoring customer transactions for anything that might indicate illegal or suspicious activity. A SAR is typically filed when a bank suspects that a transaction, or series of transactions, might involve:

• Money laundering: Attempting to disguise the origins of illegally obtained money by passing it through a legitimate banking system.
• Fraud: Including wire fraud, identity theft, and other deceptive financial activities.
• Structuring: Breaking down large sums of money into smaller deposits to avoid triggering reporting requirements (also known as “smurfing”).
• Unexplained large transactions: Transactions that don’t align with an individual’s or business’s typical activity or appear inconsistent with known financial patterns.

Common Triggers for SARs

Financial institutions are trained to spot red flags, and there are a number of scenarios that could trigger a SAR filing. Here are some of the most common:

1. Unusually Large Transactions: If an individual or business is suddenly moving unusually large amounts of money, especially in cash, this can raise red flags. Large deposits, withdrawals, or transfers that don’t align with normal activity patterns may prompt the bank to investigate further.
2. Frequent Cash Deposits Below $10,000: To avoid the $10,000 threshold that triggers an automatic Currency Transaction Report (CTR), some individuals break down larger sums into smaller deposits (a practice called structuring). If a bank detects this behavior, it will likely file a SAR.
3. Wire Transfers to High-Risk Countries: International wire transfers to or from countries that are known for terrorist activity, money laundering, or lacking robust financial regulations may result in a SAR filing.
4. Multiple Accounts Under One Name: Using multiple accounts to shuffle money back and forth—especially if the accounts seem unrelated to legitimate business or personal activities—can appear suspicious.
5. Account Activity Inconsistent with Known Business Practices: If a company typically processes small, regular transactions and suddenly starts handling large, irregular amounts, it might trigger suspicion. Likewise, if a personal account shows business-level activity, this could raise alarms.
6. Use of Shell Companies: Banks scrutinize accounts associated with shell companies that lack a clear purpose or business activity, as they are often used in money laundering schemes.
7. Unexplained Source of Funds: If the origin of deposited funds is unclear, or if large amounts of money are transferred without any legitimate explanation, the bank may file a SAR.

The Impact of a SAR Filing

When a bank files a SAR, it is confidential. The individual or business subject to the report is not directly informed; However, the bank may decide to take action based on its findings, which can include:

• Account closures: If the bank believes the activity is risky or potentially illegal, it may close your account or freeze any available funds.
• Increased monitoring: Your account may come under closer scrutiny, with more restrictions placed on transactions.
• Law enforcement involvement: If the behavior in question warrants it, the SAR could lead to a broader investigation by federal or state law enforcement agencies.

What to Do if You Believe a SAR Has Been Filed Against You

While you won’t be directly informed if a SAR has been filed, you may suspect something is amiss if your bank account is frozen, closed, or you’re contacted by law enforcement regarding your financial activity. If you find yourself in this situation, here are some steps to take:

1. Seek Legal Counsel: The most important thing you can do is consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney. A SAR filing could be the beginning of a serious investigation, and you’ll want legal guidance to protect your rights and interests.
2. Gather Financial Records: Be prepared to provide your attorney with all relevant financial records. This can help explain the nature of your transactions and demonstrate that they are legitimate.
3. Do Not Attempt to Explain Yourself to the Bank: Anything you say to the bank could be misinterpreted or used against you in a later investigation. Your attorney will be able to navigate these communications appropriately.

A Suspicious Activity Report can be a precursor to serious legal trouble, but it’s important to remember that it is not an accusation of a crime. Banks are required to report anything that appears suspicious, even if the behavior is ultimately lawful. If you find yourself facing consequences related to an SAR filing, don’t wait—contact us today for a consultation and take control of your situation before it escalates. If you are facing financial crime allegations, our skilled team of criminal defense attorneys is here to help.

What is the “Free Money Hack”?

The trend usually involves TikTok users claiming they have found ways to manipulate the financial system, offering viewers methods to “hack” or exploit bank accounts, cash apps, or credit systems to obtain free money. Some of these schemes involve:

• Overdraft exploits: Encouraging users to overdraw bank accounts and then supposedly avoid the consequences.
• Fake check schemes: Depositing fraudulent checks into accounts and withdrawing the funds before the bank detects the fraud.
• Refund fraud: Filing fake claims with companies to get refunds for purchases that were never made.

These tactics promise fast cash with minimal effort, but what they really deliver is financial and legal disaster.

Why Following the Trend is Illegal

What these TikTok videos don’t explain is the serious legal consequences of participating in such schemes. Fraud, theft, and exploiting banking systems for personal gain are criminal acts, regardless of how trendy or harmless they may seem in a 60-second clip.

Here are some common legal charges that can result from participating in these activities:

1. Bank Fraud: This is a federal crime that can result in hefty fines and imprisonment. Intentionally defrauding a financial institution is illegal under U.S. law, and following these TikTok hacks can quickly escalate into a federal investigation.
2. Wire Fraud: Many of these hacks involve electronic transfers or communications, which falls under wire fraud. This also carries severe penalties, including long prison sentences.
3. Check Fraud: Depositing fake or altered checks with the intent to withdraw funds is considered check fraud. Even if you think you’re being clever by pulling out the money before the bank catches on, it’s still a criminal act.
4. Identity Theft: Some of these schemes suggest using fake names or other people’s banking details, which could lead to identity theft charges. This is a serious offense with strict penalties.
5. Theft by Deception: If you knowingly mislead a financial institution or another individual to gain money or assets, this is classified as theft by deception. Penalties can include jail time and significant fines.

Participating in these “hacks” isn’t just risky from a financial perspective—it’s a direct pathway to legal repercussions that can follow you for the rest of your life. Depending on the scale of the fraud or theft, you could face:

• Criminal Charges: These could range from misdemeanors to felonies, depending on the amount of money involved and the nature of the crime.
• Restitution: If convicted, you could be required to pay back any money that was wrongfully obtained, along with additional penalties.
• Permanent Criminal Record: A fraud conviction can make it difficult to secure future employment, housing, or loans, and can damage your reputation permanently.

The allure of easy money is tempting, but it’s important to remember that many social media trends, like the “free money hack,” come with significant risks. Engaging in these activities can lead to criminal charges that affect your financial future and personal freedom. Before following any advice from TikTok or other social media platforms, it’s vital to understand the full legal ramifications.

If you’ve been accused of fraud or any criminal activity related to online schemes, our experienced legal team is here to help. Don’t hesitate to contact us today for a free consultation. The legal system can be complex and unforgiving, but with the right defense, you can navigate the process and work toward the best possible outcome

Money Laundering refers to the illegal process of concealing the origins of money obtained through criminal activities, making it appear as if it comes from a legitimate source. This is criminalized under 18 U.S.C. § 1956. Money laundering using NFTs involves the illicit use of these digital assets to disguise the origins of illegally obtained funds. In this context, individuals create a fake record of sales on the blockchain by selling NFTs to themselves using different accounts. Once finished, they sell the NFT to an unsuspecting buyer and repeat the process.

Fraud has grown increasingly common in the crypto landscape due to its anonymous and decentralized nature. Fraud involving NFTs can manifest in various ways due to the unique characteristics of these digital assets. This is mostly being prosecuted as wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Some common forms of fraud associated with NFTs include:

1. Fake or Stolen NFTs: Fraudsters might create counterfeit NFTs by copying digital content and attempting to sell them as original or rare pieces. Additionally, they might steal someone else’s artwork or content and mint NFTs to sell without the creator’s consent.
2. False Representation: Individuals might misrepresent the ownership or authenticity of an NFT by falsely claiming it is associated with a particular creator or source, leading buyers to believe they are purchasing something of higher value or legitimacy than it actually holds.
3. Pump-and-Dump Schemes: Similar to traditional financial markets, some individuals may engage in pump-and-dump schemes within the NFT market. This involves artificially inflating the value of certain NFTs through false hype or manipulation, only to sell them off at a high price, leaving unsuspecting buyers with devalued assets.
4. Phishing and Scams: Scammers may use phishing techniques to trick NFT owners into providing their private keys or access to their digital wallets, allowing the fraudster to steal the NFTs. Additionally, fraudulent schemes and fake NFT marketplaces can deceive buyers and sellers into making transactions for non-existent or misrepresented NFTs.
5. Rug-Pull Scheme: As the term suggests, a “rug pull” refers to a scenario where the creator of an NFT and/or gaming project solicits investments and then abruptly abandons a project and fraudulently retains the project investors’ funds.

Law enforcement is continuing to prosecute these types of NFT schemes across the nation, in cases that allege millions of dollars being defrauded. Two defendants were charged for executing a $1 million NFT money laundering and fraud scheme in January 2022. In another NFT rug-pull, Aurelien Michel was charged for diverting $2.9 million dollars in an international fraud scheme.

Wire Fraud is a serious white-collar crime and is defined under 18 USC §1343 and states:

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), or affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1343.

Generally, the 11th Circuit has stated that mail or wire fraud occurs when (1) a person intentionally participates in scheme to defraud another (2) of money or property and (3) uses mails or wires in furtherance of that scheme. Cesnik v. Edgewood Baptist Church, 88 F.3d 902 (11th Cir. 1996).

The Department of Justice however does have its own internal limitations for prosecution. According to Justice Manual 9-43.100 (Prosecution Policy Relating to Mail and Wire Fraud), “Prosecutions of fraud ordinarily should not be undertaken if the scheme employed consists of some isolated transactions between individuals, involving minor loss to the victims, in which case the parties should be left to settle their differences by civil or criminal litigation in the state courts. Serious consideration, however, should be given to the prosecution of any scheme which in its nature is directed to defrauding a class of persons, or the general public, with a substantial pattern of conduct.”

Alternatives to prosecutions can also come in the form of Pretrial Diversion (PTD). PTD programs divert certain offenders from traditional criminal justice processing into alternative systems of supervision and services. Individuals who successfully complete a PTD program may qualify for a range of case outcomes, including the declination of charges, dismissal or reduction of charges, or a more favorable recommendation at sentencing.

Navigating serious crimes like these can be the toughest thing you have ever done. Don’t do it alone. Contact our team today for more information about how we can protect your rights.

RDAP consists of 3 intensive phases, totaling over 500-hours of voluntary individual and group treatment, and it is about 9-12 months long. This program offers prisoners to live in a modified prosocial community within the prison, separate from the general population. They split their day in half with vocational, work, or school activities and the other half in treatment/programs. Prisoners must meet specific requirements to be considered for this program, and space is often limited. The prisoner must have at least 24 months remaining in their sentence to complete the program.

Since some inmates may have less than a 24-month sentence, the FBOP also offers a Non-Residential Drug Abuse Program (NRDAP), where prisoners can participate in 12-24 weeks of Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment. This treatment consists of skill-building within communication, rational thinking, and institution adjustment. NRDAP is often offered in a group setting and is more accessible to prisoners because of the less strict qualifications. NRDAP differs from RDAP because offenders may join this program if they have short sentences, are not eligible for RDAP, or awaiting availability.

The key benefit other than treatment is that those inmates who successfully complete either program may be eligible for a maximum pre-release time in a residential re-entry center, such as a halfway house, where treatment continues thus shortening the actual time incarcerated.

For more information, please click here or feel free to access our blog or contact Conaway & Strickler, PC to discuss this in more detail.

With all of this going on, the US Attorney’s office increased its prosecutions of individuals of white collar crimes in the year 2021. White collar charges like fraud, theft, corruption, bribery, environmental crime, tax fraud, health care fraud, procurement fraud, money laundering, PPP loan fraud, etc will continue to get more attention from the Department of Justice.

What does this mean? It means that investigations of any sort need to be taken seriously and that you should contact a lawyer immediately if any wrongdoing is alleged.

Conaway & Strickler, PC has a long history of handling fraud cases of all varieties and is well equipped at fighting the DOJ in their overzealous prosecutions. Please feel free to contact us so that we can help you avoid future headaches.