18 U.S.C. § 1720

Canceled stamps and envelopes

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

Whoever uses or attempts to use in payment of postage, any canceled postage stamp, whether the same has been used or not, or removes, attempts to remove, or assists in removing, the canceling or defacing marks from any postage stamp, or the superscription from any stamped envelope, or postal card, that has once been used in payment of postage, with the intent to use the same for a like purpose, or to sell or offer to sell the same, or knowingly possesses any such postage stamp, stamped envelope, or postal card, with intent to use the same or knowingly sells or offers to sell any such postage stamp, stamped envelope, or postal card, or uses or attempts to use the same in payment of postage; or

Whoever unlawfully and willfully removes from any mail matter any stamp attached thereto in payment of postage; or

Whoever knowingly uses in payment of postage, any postage stamp, postal card, or stamped envelope, issued in pursuance of law, which has already been used for a like purpose—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; but if he is a person employed in the Postal Service, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1958–2015 · leading case: United States v. Hogsett

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Hogsett (1958) cma · cites it 4× “*686 The Government contends that the conduct alleged comes expressly within the purview of 18 USC § 1720 which contains the following provisions: “Whoever uses or attempts to use in payment of postage, any canceled postage stamp, whether the same has been used or not, or…”

Commonwealth ex rel. Kearney v. Rambler (2011) pa “§ 1024 ; [and] attempting to mail a letter using a stamp which has already been cancelled if committed by a postal employee, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1720 .... In the instant case none of the three violations of which Melton was convicted would constitute a felony under our statutory…”

Melton v. Oleson (1974) mont · cites it 2× “§ 1024 ; attempting to mail a letter using a stamp which has already been cancelled if committed by a postal employee, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1720 . Did our Montana legislature intend to deny its citizens the right to vote for offenses like these? In the instant case none of the three…”

Cleveland v. Harvanek (2015) ca10 “18 U.S.C. § 1720 . Cleveland’s argument that the Postal Service sent the letters despite the misplaced stamps is unavailing; his ability to deceive the Postal Service does not lessen the prison’s interest in deterring illegal activities.”

Mills v. Campbell County Canvassing Board (1985) wyo “§ 1024 ; attempting to mail a letter using a stamp which has already been cancelled if committed by a postal employee, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1720 . Did our Montana legislature intend to deny its citizens the right to vote for offenses like these? “In the instant case none of the three…”

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.