Ark. Code Ann. » Title 5 Chapter 37
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (2026)

Fraudulent use of a credit card or debit card

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. A person commits the offense of fraudulent use of a credit card or debit card, if with purpose to defraud, he or she uses a credit card, credit card account number, debit card, or debit card account number to obtain property or a service with knowledge that:
    1. The credit card, credit card account number, debit card, or debit card account number is stolen;
    2. The credit card, credit card account number, debit card, or debit card account number has been revoked or cancelled;
    3. The credit card, credit card account number, debit card, or debit card account number is forged; or
    4. For any other reason his or her use of the credit card, credit card account number, debit card, or debit card account number is unauthorized by either the issuer or the person to whom the credit card or debit card is issued.
  2. Fraudulent use of a credit card or debit card is a:
    1. Class B felony if the value of all moneys, goods, or services obtained during any six-month period is twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000) or more;
    2. Class C felony if the value of all moneys, goods, or services obtained during any six-month period is less than twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000) but more than five thousand dollars ($5,000);
    3. Class D felony if the value of all moneys, goods, or services obtained during any six-month period is five thousand dollars ($5,000) or less but more than one thousand dollars ($1,000); or
    4. Class A misdemeanor if the value of all moneys, goods, or services obtained during any six-month period is one thousand dollars ($1,000) or less.

History. Acts 1975, No. 280, § 2308; A.S.A. 1947, § 41-2308; Acts 1997, No. 516, § 4; 2001, No. 1142, § 1; 2011, No. 570, § 27.

A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 2011, No. 570, § 1, provided:

“Legislative intent. The intent of this act is to implement comprehensive measures designed to reduce recidivism, hold offenders accountable, and contain correction costs.”

Amendments. The 2011 amendment rewrote (b)(1) and (b)(2); and added (b)(3) and (b)(4).

Research References

ALR.

Criminal Liability for Unauthorized Use of Credit Card under State Credit Card Statutes. 68 A.L.R.6th 527.

Case Notes

Elements of Offense.

In general, under this section, it is the use of a stolen, revoked or cancelled, forged, or unauthorized credit card that results in a criminal violation; specifically, it is the use of the account numbers. Patterson v. State, 326 Ark. 1004, 935 S.W.2d 266 (1996).

Evidence.

Evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for fraudulent use of a credit card under this section where company representatives stated that defendant was not authorized to use the card, and defendant made inconsistent statements as to why he was purchasing gasoline with the card. The fact that defendant paid for the gasoline himself did not erase his attempt to use the card. Lee v. State, 102 Ark. App. 23, 279 S.W.3d 496 (2008).

While defendant worked for the sheriff's department, she was authorized to use the department's credit card only for county purchases; her use of the card for personal purchases was sufficient to support her conviction for fraudulently using a credit card in violation of subdivision (a)(4) of this section. Baker v. State, 2009 Ark. App. 788 (2009).

Trial court properly denied defendant's motions for a directed verdict on the offense of fraudulent use of a credit card because the evidence was sufficient to find that defendant used her boss's credit card with the purpose to defraud and that such use was unauthorized; defendant admitted having financial difficulties at the time and confessed that she used the credit card. Stone v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 543, 473 S.W.3d 29 (2015).

There was substantial evidence to sustain conviction for fraudulent use of a credit card where defendant was identified from a video in a retail store; it was up to the jury to decide the weight and credibility of the evidence showing that defendant was the one making each transaction on the victims' credit cards. Williams v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 553, 472 S.W.3d 509 (2015).

Evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for fraudulent use of a credit card where a patient testified that he found a charge on his credit card bill dated more than a month after he had stopped seeing defendant. Gervais v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 161, 544 S.W.3d 590 (2018).

Obtaining Property.

Obtaining property is required in order for there to be a consummated offense. Davidson v. State, 305 Ark. 592, 810 S.W.2d 327 (1991).

What militates against an interpretation that obtaining the property is not required is the fact that the degree of the offense under the statute is based on the value of property obtained; it is a Class C felony if goods valuing more than $100 are obtained; otherwise, it is a Class A misdemeanor. Davidson v. State, 305 Ark. 592, 810 S.W.2d 327 (1991).

Where defendant was charged for fraudulent use of a credit card but he never obtained property as required by the section, the case was remanded for judgment of conviction to be entered for the lesser included offense of attempted fraudulent use of credit cards. Davidson v. State, 305 Ark. 592, 810 S.W.2d 327 (1991).

Cited: Brown v. State, 85 Ark. App. 382, 155 S.W.3d 22 (2004).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1991–2024 · leading case: Davidson v. State, 810 S.W.2d 327 (Ark. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Davidson v. State, 810 S.W.2d 327 (Ark. 1991). · cites it 20× “The sole issue on appeal is *328 whether a conviction under the applicable statute [Ark.Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (1987) is appropriate, when no property was obtained by the appellant as a result of the fraudulent use.”
Brown v. State, 155 S.W.3d 22 (Ark. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (b)(1) (Supp. 2003).”
Patterson v. State, 935 S.W.2d 266 (Ark. 1996). · cites it 8× “The court of appeals certified this case as one involving statutory interpretation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (Repl. 1993). Appellant Sharilyn Patterson was charged under § 5-37-207 with using Val Hansen’s credit card to obtain property exceeding $100.”
Moore v. State, 126 P.3d 508 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 2× “(quoting Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (1987)). Id. (citing to Ark.”
Lenard v. Kelley, 2017 Ark. 186 (Ark. 2017). · cites it 2× “2006); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (b)(l) (Repl. 2006).”
Stone v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 543 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 6× “” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (Repl. 2013). In general, under the provisions of section 5-37-207, it is the use of a stolen, revoked or cancelled, forged, or unauthorized credit card that results in criminal violation.”
Lee v. State, 279 S.W.3d 496 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Lee arrived back in Fort Smith late (due to mechanical problems), dropped off the rented truck, and went home.”
Lenderman v. State, 2017 Ark. App. 1 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (b)(2) (Repl. 2013).”
Jeffery Matlock v. State of Arkansas, 2024 Ark. App. 69 (Ark. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “erty (credit card) under Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-36-103, a Class D felony; aggravated assault of a family or household member under Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-26-306,7 a Class D felony; terroristic threatening in the first degree under Arkansas Code Annotated…”
Williams v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 553 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 6× “Patterson involved interpretation of a prior version of the statute, Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-37-207 (Repl. 1993), which re-orred to credit cards but not to debit cards or account numbers.”
Withers v. State, 218 S.W.3d 386 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “We observe that in 2001, the legislature amended Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207 , titled “Fraudulent use of a credit card,” to also criminalize the fraudulent use of a debit card.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207(a) — 1 case
Williams v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 553 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015). “Patterson involved interpretation of a prior version of the statute, Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-37-207 (Repl. 1993), which re-orred to credit cards but not to debit cards or account numbers.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-37-207(b) — 1 case
Davidson v. State, 810 S.W.2d 327 (Ark. 1991). “The sole issue on appeal is *328 whether a conviction under the applicable statute [Ark.Code Ann. § 5-37-207 (1987) is appropriate, when no property was obtained by the appellant as a result of the fraudulent use.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.