Whoever directly or indirectly accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer
system, or computer network for the purpose of: (1) devising or executing any scheme
or artifice to defraud; (2) obtaining money, property, or services by means of false
or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises; or (3) damaging, destroying,
altering, deleting, or removing any program or data contained in it in connection
with any scheme or artifice to defraud, shall be guilty of a felony and shall be subject
to the penalties set forth in § 11-52-5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2022 · leading case:
State v. Smith, 662 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 1995).
State v. Smith, 662 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 1995).
“1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-52-2, as amended by P.L.1989, ch. 136, § 1 (computer information); § 11-35-16, as amended by P.”
State v. Adam Jilling, 275 A.3d 1160 (R.I. 2022).
· cites it 44× “The Superior Court dismissed several counts of the criminal information against them alleging accessing a computer system for fraudulent purposes, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-52-2, and conspiracy. On appeal, the state argues that the trial justice erred when he conducted what…”
State v. Tatro, 659 A.2d 106 (R.I. 1995).
“1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-52-2, as amended by P.L. 1983, ch. 246, § 1; and one count of receipt of stolen goods valued under $500 under G.”
State v. Pari, 553 A.2d 135 (R.I. 1989).
“1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 11-52-2. Pursuant to G.L. 1956 (1981 Reenactment) § 12-19-2 the trial justice ordered that defendant begin serving his sentence at a minimum-security, work-release facility at the ACI.”
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.