Organized Scheme to Defraud Defense Attorney in West Palm Beach

Florida Statute 817.034

Organized Scheme to Defraud​
This statute aims to prosecute individuals involved in highly organized criminal operations such as wire fraud, bank fraud, security fraud, and money laundering. These pieces of legislation both involve complex statutory schemes that significantly increase the scope of possible punishments for individuals charged with bank fraud or other organized crime activities. The complexity of these laws and the crimes they apply to make it extremely important that individuals charged with bank fraud in Colorado seek representation from a criminal defense attorney experienced with the intricacies of both the COCA and the RICO.

Mark Solomon, Criminal Defense Lawyer

Attorney Mark Solomon
954-463-6755
866-283-2694
Protecting Your Rights 24/7

Florida Communications Fraud ActThe Florida Communications Fraud Act is defined as follows:
(1) LEGISLATIVE INTENT.–

  1. The Legislature recognizes that schemes to defraud have proliferated in the United States in recent years and that many operators of schemes to defraud use communications technology to solicit victims and thereby conceal their identities and overcome a victim’s normal resistance to sales pressure by delivering a personalized sales message.
  2. It is the intent of the Legislature to prevent the use of communications technology in furtherance of schemes to defraud by consolidating former statutes concerning schemes to defraud and organized fraud to permit prosecution of these crimes utilizing the legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes.

(2) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the “Florida Communications Fraud Act.”
(3) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Communicate” means to transmit or transfer or to cause another to transmit or transfer signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligences of any nature in whole or in part by mail, or by wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo optical system.
(b) “Obtain” means temporarily or permanently to deprive any person of the right to property or a benefit therefrom, or to appropriate the property to one’s own use or to the use of any other person not entitled thereto.
(c) “Property” means anything of value, and includes:

  1. Real property, including things growing on, affixed to, or found in land;
  2. Tangible or intangible personal property, including rights, privileges, interests, and claims; and
  3. Services.

(d) “Scheme to defraud” means a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.
(e) “Value” means value determined according to any of the following:
1.
a. The market value of the property at the time and place of the offense, or, if such cannot be satisfactorily ascertained, the cost of replacement of the property within a reasonable time after the offense.
b. The value of a written instrument that does not have a readily ascertainable market value, in the case of an instrument such as a check, draft, or promissory note, is the amount due or collectible or is, in the case of any other instrument which creates, releases, discharges, or otherwise affects any valuable legal right, privilege, or obligation, the greatest amount of economic loss that the owner of the instrument might reasonably suffer by virtue of the loss of the instrument.
c. The value of a trade secret that does not have a readily ascertainable market value is any reasonable value representing the damage to the owner, suffered by reason of losing an advantage over those who do not know of or use the trade secret.
2. If the value of property cannot be ascertained, the trier of fact may find the value to be not less than a certain amount; if no such minimum value can be ascertained, the value is an amount less than $300.
3. Amounts of value of separate properties obtained in one scheme to defraud, whether from the same person or from several persons, shall be aggregated in determining the grade of the offense under paragraph (4)(a).
(4) OFFENSES.–
(a) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud, punishable as follows:

  1. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $50,000 or more, the violator is guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s.775.084.
  2. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $20,000 or more, but less than $50,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s.775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
  3. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of less than $20,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s.775.084.

(b) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and, in furtherance of that scheme, communicates with any person with intent to obtain property from that person is guilty, for each such act of communication, of communications fraud, punishable as follows:

  1. If the value of property obtained or endeavored to be obtained by the communication is valued at $300 or more, the violator is guilty of a third degree felony, punishable as set forth in s.775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
  2. If the value of the property obtained or endeavored to be obtained by the communication is valued at less than $300, the violator is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as set forth in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(c) Notwithstanding any contrary provisions of law, separate judgments and sentences for organized fraud under paragraph (a) and for each offense of communications fraud under paragraph (b) may be imposed when all such offenses involve the same scheme to defraud.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a criminal action or civil action or proceeding under this section may be commenced at any time within 5 years after the cause of action accrues; however, in a criminal proceeding under this section, the period of limitation does not run during any time when the defendant is continuously absent from the state or is without a reasonably ascertainable place of abode or work within the state, but in no case shall this extend the period of limitation otherwise applicable by more than 1 year.
Exploitation of the Elderly
Florida Statutes 825.103

Exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult; penalties.–
(1) “Exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult” means:
(a) Knowingly obtaining or using, or endeavoring to obtain or use, an elderly person’s or disabled adult’s funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property, or to benefit someone other than the elderly person or disabled adult, by a person who:

​1. Stands in a position of trust and confidence with the elderly person or disabled adult; or
2. Has a business relationship with the elderly person or disabled adult;
(b) Obtaining or using, endeavoring to obtain or use, or conspiring with another to obtain or use an elderly person’s or disabled adult’s funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property, or to benefit someone other than the elderly person or disabled adult, by a person who knows or reasonably should know that the elderly person or disabled adult lacks the capacity to consent;
(c) Breach of a fiduciary duty to an elderly person or disabled adult by the person’s guardian, trustee who is an individual, or agent under a power of attorney which results in an unauthorized appropriation, sale, or transfer of property. An unauthorized appropriation under this paragraph occurs when the elderly person or disabled adult does not receive the reasonably equivalent financial value in goods or services, or when the fiduciary violates any of these duties:
1. For agents appointed under chapter 709:
a. Committing fraud in obtaining their appointments;
b. Abusing their powers;
c. Wasting, embezzling, or intentionally mismanaging the assets of the principal or beneficiary; or
d. Acting contrary to the principal’s sole benefit or best interest; or
2. For guardians and trustees who are individuals and who are appointed under chapter 736 or chapter 744:
a. Committing fraud in obtaining their appointments;
b. Abusing their powers; or
c. Wasting, embezzling, or intentionally mismanaging the assets of the ward or beneficiary of the trust;
(d) Misappropriating, misusing, or transferring without authorization money belonging to an elderly person or disabled adult from an account in which the elderly person or disabled adult placed the funds, owned the funds, and was the sole contributor or payee of the funds before the misappropriation, misuse, or unauthorized transfer. This paragraph only applies to the following types of accounts:
1. Personal accounts;
2. Joint accounts created with the intent that only the elderly person or disabled adult enjoys all rights, interests, and claims to moneys deposited into such account; or
3. Convenience accounts created in accordance with s. 655.80; or
(e) Intentionally or negligently failing to effectively use an elderly person’s or disabled adult’s income and assets for the necessities required for that person’s support and maintenance, by a caregiver or a person who stands in a position of trust and confidence with the elderly person or disabled adult.
(2) Any inter vivos transfer of money or property valued in excess of $10,000 at the time of the transfer, whether in a single transaction or multiple transactions, by a person age 65 or older to a nonrelative whom the transferor knew for fewer than 2 years before the first transfer and for which the transferor did not receive the reasonably equivalent financial value in goods or services creates a permissive presumption that the transfer was the result of exploitation.
(a) This subsection applies regardless of whether the transfer or transfers are denoted by the parties as a gift or loan, except that it does not apply to a valid loan evidenced in writing that includes definite repayment dates. However, if repayment of any such loan is in default, in whole or in part, for more than 65 days, the presumption of this subsection applies.
(b) This subsection does not apply to:
1. Persons who are in the business of making loans.
2. Bona fide charitable donations to nonprofit organizations that qualify for tax exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code.
(c) In a criminal case to which this subsection applies, if the trial is by jury, jurors shall be instructed that they may, but are not required to, draw an inference of exploitation upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the facts listed in this subsection. The presumption of this subsection imposes no burden of proof on the defendant.
(3)(a) If the funds, assets, or property involved in the exploitation of the elderly person or disabled adult is valued at $50,000 or more, the offender commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b) If the funds, assets, or property involved in the exploitation of the elderly person or disabled adult is valued at $10,000 or more, but less than $50,000, the offender commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(c) If the funds, assets, or property involved in the exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult is valued at less than $10,000, the offender commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(4) If a person is charged with financial exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult that involves the taking of or loss of property valued at more than $5,000 and property belonging to a victim is seized from the defendant pursuant to a search warrant, the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing and determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, whether the defendant unlawfully obtained the victim’s property. If the court finds that the property was unlawfully obtained, the court may order it returned to the victim for restitution purposes before trial on the charge. This determination is inadmissible in evidence at trial on the charge and does not give rise to any inference that the defendant has committed an offense under this section.