Summary
The Third Circuit affirmed Theodore Williams's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2) for passing a forged Treasury check with intent to defraud. The court held that the statutory term "passes" does not require the defendant to represent that the check or endorsement is genuine, even when the recipient knows it is forged.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2)'s prohibition on passing a Treasury check requires the defendant to represent that the check or its endorsement is genuine.
- Whether Williams's conviction could be sustained when the undercover purchaser knew the endorsement was forged and Williams made no representation of genuineness.
Holdings
- A defendant may violate 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2) by passing a Treasury check with intent to defraud without representing to the recipient that the check or endorsement is genuine.
- Because section 510(a)(2) proscribes passing and uttering in the disjunctive, proof that Williams passed the forged Treasury check was sufficient to support his conviction even absent proof that he uttered it by representing it as genuine.
Key quotations
“Surely if Congress had intended that transfer include a representation of genuineness under section 510(a)(2), it would not have omitted the "as true" language.” (¶ 11)
“We regard DeFilippis as a compelling precedent as passing a forged Treasury check and passing altered currency both involve transfers of intangible property.” (¶ 15)
“In any event if the subsections are to be mutually exclusive, though we see no reason why they should be, Congress will have to rewrite them as we cannot.” (¶ 28)
Factual background
Williams sold a $500 United States Treasury check bearing a forged endorsement to an undercover Secret Service agent for $200. The agent knew that the endorsement was forged, and Williams did not represent that the check or endorsement was genuine. Williams was charged with knowingly and with intent to defraud passing and uttering a Treasury check in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2).
Procedural history
Williams was tried before a magistrate and convicted of passing and uttering a Treasury check with a forged endorsement under 18 U.S.C. § 510(a)(2). The magistrate initially granted Williams's Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal because Williams had not represented that the check was genuine, but later granted the government's motion for reconsideration and reinstated the verdict. The district court affirmed, and the Third Circuit affirmed the district court.