From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Scaramuzzo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 18, 1974
505 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1974)

Opinion

No. 74-2164.

October 18, 1974.

Stephen Stein (argued), Goodman, Snyder Gang, Las Vegas, Nev., for defendant-appellant.

Stuart W. Rudnick, Special Atty. (appeared), Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.

Before BROWNING, DUNIWAY, and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.

Honorable Joe McDonald Ingraham, Senior Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.


OPINION


Appellant was convicted of devising a scheme to defraud the Central Telephone Company in Las Vegas, Nevada, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The evidence established that appellant avoided toll charges for at least one long distance call from Las Vegas to Los Angeles by first placing a toll-free call to an area code 800 number subscribed to by the American Express Company in Phoenix, Arizona, and then diverting that call to the Los Angeles number by use of an electronic device called a "blue box."

There is no merit in appellant's contention that 18 U.S.C. § 1343 does not apply to frauds involving telephone communications. This court has twice affirmed convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 in which interstate telephone calls played an integral role in the scheme to defraud, Battaglia v. United States, 349 F.2d 556 (9th Cir. 1965); Spindler v. United States, 336 F.2d 678 (9th Cir. 1964), and the legislative history of the 1956 amendment to the statute demonstrates that Congress intended to reach frauds perpetrated by telephone. H.R. Rep. No. 2385, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956), 1956 U.S. Code Cong. Admin. News, p. 3091.

Alternatively, appellant argues that the statute must be read to apply only to frauds committed on the recipient of the message, not the transmitter. We agree with the conclusion of the Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Tenth Circuits that this contention is without merit. See Scott v. United States, 448 F.2d 581, 583 n.5 (5th Cir. 1971); Brandon v. United States, 382 F.2d 607, 611 (10th Cir. 1967).

We are not impressed with appellant's suggestion at oral argument that the scheme to defraud may have been completed before any interstate transmission of sounds or signals occurred, but, in any event, this contention was not properly raised in the district court.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Scaramuzzo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 18, 1974
505 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1974)
Case details for

United States v. Scaramuzzo

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. FRANK VICTOR SCARAMUZZO…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 18, 1974

Citations

505 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1974)

Citing Cases

United States v. Wise

All that the statute requires is a scheme to defraud and an interstate telephone call made in furtherance of…

United States v. Freeman

Brandon v. United States, 382 F.2d 607, 610 (10th Cir. 1967); Huff v. United States, 301 F.2d 760, 765 (5th…