18 U.S.C. § 1544

Misuse of passport

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whoever willfully and knowingly uses, or attempts to use, any passport issued or designed for the use of another; or

Whoever willfully and knowingly uses or attempts to use any passport in violation of the conditions or restrictions therein contained, or of the rules prescribed pursuant to the laws regulating the issuance of passports; or

Whoever willfully and knowingly furnishes, disposes of, or delivers a passport to any person, for use by another than the person for whose use it was originally issued and designed—

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 25 years (if the offense was committed to facilitate an act of international terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this title)), 20 years (if the offense was committed to facilitate a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 929(a) of this title)), 10 years (in the case of the first or second such offense, if the offense was not committed to facilitate such an act of international terrorism or a drug trafficking crime), or 15 years (in the case of any other offense), or both.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 66 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1954–2024 · leading case: Vinh Nguyen v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vinh Nguyen v. Eric Holder, Jr. (2014) ca9 · cites it 13× “Opinion by Judge Pregerson; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Tallman SUMMARY* Immigration The panel denied in part and granted in part Vinh Tan Nguyen’s petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision, which held that his conviction for misuse of…”

United States v. Sanchez-Gomez (2018) scotus “§§ 952 and 960 ; Sanchez-Gomez, to felony misuse of a passport, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544 ; and Patricio-Guzman, to misdemeanor illegal entry into the United States, in violation of 8 U.”

United States v. Rene Sanchez-Gomez (2017) ca9 · cites it 2× “2 Sanchez-Gomez was charged with felony misuse of a passport in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544 . He filed an emergency motion (identical to Morales’s motion) challenging the restraint policy.”

United States v. Unis Bah (2006) ca8 “1, the court must have determined that the evidence established that Bah had violated either 18 U.S.C. § 1544 (misuse of a passport) or 18 U.”

United States v. Ryan Holness (2013) ca4 “Count Four related to a January 2008 incident whereby Holness reported his daughter’s passport lost in order to obtain a duplicate that he hoped would allow his son to enter the country from Jamaica, see J.”

Keil v. Triveline (2011) ca8 “§ 911 , and misuse of a passport in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544 . A magistrate judge issued the complaint, formally charging Keil with the offenses.”

United States v. Sterling Johnson (1984) ca9 · cites it 3× “§§ 952 (a), 960(a)(1) and misuse of a diplomatic passport under 18 U.S.C. § 1544 . We affirm. The trial judge’s instruction on the intent necessary to convict for both offenses was not erroneous.”

United States v. James Thomas York and Stephen Joseph York (1978) ca5 “§ 1113 (attempting to commit murder); 18 U.S.C. § 1544 (attempting to use the passport of another), and 18 U.”

Leonard Guzell v. R. Hiller and J. Gawlik (2000) ca7 “18 U.S.C. § 1544 . But it does not follow that Bacik could not have pledged the passport to him as security for his advancing her the money for the airline ticket.”

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson (1995) cacd “§§ 1542-1543 (forgery or false use of passport); 18 U.S.C. § 1544 (misuse of passport); 18 U.”

United States v. Michael S. Cohen (2002) ca3 “Only by examining the Ayubi docket sheets ourselves have we been able to learn the charges against Ayubi (bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544 ) and the disposition of those charges (he pled *158 guilty to an information).”

United States v. Michael Medjuck, and Arthur John Jung, AKA Charles Peter Sotirkys (1995) ca9 “4 tons of hashish with .intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1).”

Show all 66 citing cases →

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.