18 U.S.C. § 2315

Sale or receipt of stolen goods, securities, moneys, or fraudulent State tax stamps

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

Whoever receives, possesses, conceals, stores, barters, sells, or disposes of any goods, wares, or merchandise, securities, or money of the value of $5,000 or more, or pledges or accepts as security for a loan any goods, wares, or merchandise, or securities, of the value of $500 or more, which have crossed a State or United States boundary after being stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken, knowing the same to have been stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken; or

Whoever receives, possesses, conceals, stores, barters, sells, or disposes of any falsely made, forged, altered, or counterfeited securities or tax stamps, or pledges or accepts as security for a loan any falsely made, forged, altered, or counterfeited securities or tax stamps, moving as, or which are a part of, or which constitute interstate or foreign commerce, knowing the same to have been so falsely made, forged, altered, or counterfeited; or

Whoever receives in interstate or foreign commerce, or conceals, stores, barters, sells, or disposes of, any tool, implement, or thing used or intended to be used in falsely making, forging, altering, or counterfeiting any security or tax stamp, or any part thereof, moving as, or which is a part of, or which constitutes interstate or foreign commerce, knowing that the same is fitted to be used, or has been used, in falsely making, forging, altering, or counterfeiting any security or tax stamp, or any part thereof; or

‘Whoever 11 So in original. The quotation mark probably should not appear. receives, possesses, conceals, stores, barters, sells, or disposes of any veterans’ memorial object which has crossed a State or United States boundary after being stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken, knowing the same to have been stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken—’ 1

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. If the offense involves a pre-retail medical product (as defined in section 670) the punishment for the offense shall be the same as the punishment for an offense under section 670 unless the punishment under this section is greater. If the offense involves the receipt, possession, concealment, storage, barter, sale, or disposal of veterans’ memorial objects with a value, in the aggregate, of less than $1,000, the defendant shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

This section shall not apply to any falsely made, forged, altered, counterfeited, or spurious representation of an obligation or other security of the United States or of an obligation, bond, certificate, security, treasury note, bill, promise to pay, or bank note, issued by any foreign government. This section also shall not apply to any falsely made, forged, altered, counterfeited, or spurious representation of any bank note or bill issued by a bank or corporation of any foreign country which is intended by the laws or usage of such country to circulate as money.

For purposes of this section, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States. For purposes of this section the term “veterans’ memorial object” means a grave marker, headstone, monument, or other object, intended to permanently honor a veteran or mark a veteran’s grave, or any monument that signifies an event of national military historical significance.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 447 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1950–2026 · leading case: McElroy v. United States

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McElroy v. United States (1982) scotus · cites it 10× “commerce" in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 2315 . The court rejected the defendants' argument that the stolen goods had been taken out of interstate commerce by coming to rest, holding that "[s]o long as its movement within the destination state can be considered a continuation of…”

United States v. Hugh Reed, Jay D. Hatton, Kerry M. Martin, Thomas C. Lawson, and Charles M. Terrell (1981) ca6 · cites it 13× “Terrell were charged jointly in a three count indictment with receiving and concealing stolen goods and wares having a value in excess of $5,000 and traveling through interstate commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2315 and 2 (1976). Count 1 involved certain property stolen…”

United States v. Mardirosian (2010) ca1 · cites it 11× “Mardirosian was convicted by a jury of one count of possessing, concealing or storing six stolen paintings, including a rare Cézanne valued at $29 million, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . On appeal, Mardirosian argues that there was insufficient evidence for the jury to…”

United States v. Frederick Schultz (2003) ca2 · cites it 4× “The underlying substantive offense was violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 , the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA).”

Rugendorf v. United States (1964) scotus · cites it 4× “Following a trial by jury, petitioner was convicted of violating 18 U. S. C. § 2315 [1] by knowingly receiving, concealing and storing 81 stolen fur pieces, the fur pieces having been transported in interstate commerce and having a value exceeding $5,000.”

United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius (2017) dcd · cites it 4× “18 U.S.C. § 2315 The text of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 illustrates even clearer congressional intent for the statute to apply to the conduct alleged in the Amended Complaint.”

United States v. Glenn Arthur McClintic Jr. (1978) ca8 · cites it 5× “I Defendant contends that the trial court erred by refusing to dismiss counts II, III, and V of the indictment as fatally defective for failing to charge a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . 2 Defendant complains that by charging him with receipt of stolen merchandise which he knew…”

United States v. Gerald L. Singer, United States of America v. Raymond E. Wagner (1981) ca8 · cites it 4× “Wagner first argues that the government “manufactured” the requisite interstate commerce element under 18 U.S.C. § 2315 (count I) by deliberately changing the place of delivery from Olathe, Kansas, to Kansas City, Missouri.”

United States v. Joseph J. Neary (1977) ca7 · cites it 4× “On January 28, 1975 the defendant was indicted for concealing and disposing of securities moving in interstate commerce, valued at $5,000 or more, knowing them to have been stolen, in violation of 18 U.S.C § 2315. Under § 2315, the maximum term of imprisonment for this offense…”

United States v. Frederick Kakos (2007) ca6 · cites it 3× “Defendant Frederick Kakos appeals his conviction for the interstate receipt of stolen property pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . Defendant was charged, in a single count indictment, with knowingly receiving a stolen trailer and the stolen meat contained within that trailer.”

United States v. Michael Tobin, Ralph Reda, Dorothy Morse, A/K/A Dottie, and Marsha Morse (1978) ca5 · cites it 5× “1 They also contend that the trial judge gave an erroneous instruction on reasonable doubt, that there was a fatal variance between the indictment and the proof at trial, and that the judge should have granted their post-trial motion for an in camera inspection of the grand jury…”

United States v. Peter Licavoli, Sr. (1979) ca9 · cites it 3× “appeals his conviction for receiving stolen goods in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . Licavoli contends that the district court should have suppressed evidence obtained through the use of electronic surveillance devices.”

Show all 447 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.