18 U.S.C. § 2425
Use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor
Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, knowingly initiates the transmission of the name, address, telephone number, social security number, or electronic mail address of another individual, knowing that such other individual has not attained the age of 16 years, with the intent to entice, encourage, offer, or solicit any person to engage in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 32
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: United States v. Taylor
United States v. Taylor (2003)
“PER CURIAM: James Finley Taylor appeals the special conditions of supervised release imposed on him pursuant to his conviction for use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor “with the intent to entice, encourage, offer, or solicit any person to engage in…”
United States v. Jeffrey York (2022)
“§ 2422 (b), and attempting to use interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . The charge was based on York’s communications with 15-year-old “Brionica,” who was really an FBI agent.”
United States v. Philip A. Giordano (2006)
“18 U.S.C. § 2425 . Section 371 of Title 18 makes it a crime to conspire to commit the offense described in § 2425.”
United States v. Laureys (2011)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . And other provisions penalize transporting "any individual" for sex crimes, id.”
United States v. Montijo-Maysonet (2020)
“commerce" under a similar statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2425 ). - 33 - 223, 227 (1st Cir.”
Doe v. City of Waterbury (2006)
“§ 242 ; (2) conspiring to knowingly initiate the transmission of the minor victims’ names by using means of interstate commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2425 and 371; and (3) knowingly initiating the transmission of the minor victims’ *541 names by using means of interstate…”
United States v. Brian Fay Jeremiah (2006)
“Brian Fay Jeremiah pleaded guilty to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 (2000) for using interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor “with the intent to entice, encourage, offer, or solicit” criminal sexual activity, and the District Court sentenced Jeremiah to…”
United States v. Rafael Mercado Berrios (2022)
“§ 2422 (b) and use of interstate facilities to attempt to transmit information about a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . He opposed a government motion to preclude an entrapment de- fense, but the district court ruled against him.”
United States v. Giordano (2002)
“The remaining counts identify eleven separate instances in which Giordano and Jones are alleged to have knowingly initiated the transmission of the names of either victim by using cellular telephones and other telephones knowing that the victims had not attained the age of 16…”
Joe Daniel Holt, Jr. v. Robert M. Baker (2017)
“§ 241 ; deprived him of his rights, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; stole his property, in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Pierce (2011)
“3d at 39-41 (finding, as a matter of statutory interpretation, that intrastate telephone use constitutes the use of a facility or means of interstate commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2425 (2006)); Marek, 238 F.3d at 315-16 (using statutory construction to determine whether use of an…”
United States v. Giordano (2003)
“§ 242 (Counts One and Two); (2) conspiring to knowingly initiate the transmission of the' minor victims’ names by using facilities and means of interstate and foreign commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2425 and 371 (Count Three); and (3) knowingly initiating the transmission…”
United States v. Giordano (2003)
“On the same date, the court issued an order granting the application and issued a criminal complaint charging Jones with conspiring to violate and violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 2425 and 371. The FBI arrested Jones on July 21, 2001.”
United States v. Chambers (2017)
“2006) (rejecting constitutional challenge to law prohibiting use of “the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce” to entice a minor to engage in sexual activity, 18 U.S.C. § 2425 , because statute was “clearly founded on the second type of Commerce Clause…”
United States v. Loren Copp (2021)
“083 and 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . The district court1 sentenced him to 780 months in prison.”
Commonwealth v. Muniz, J., Aplt. (2017)
“§2424 (relating to filing factual statement about alien individual); 18 U.S.C. §2425 (relating to use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor); a comparable military offense or similar offense under the laws of another jurisdiction or foreign country or…”
United States v. Giordano (2001)
“Giordano, was arrested on July 26, 2001, and charged in a criminal complaint with the use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor and conspiracy to do so in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2425 and 371. At the defendant’s initial appearance on July 26, 2001, the…”
United States v. King (2008)
“§ 1591 , sex trafficking of children, and 18 U.S.C. § 2425 , transmitting information about a minor.”
United States v. Giordano (2006)
“We reject Giordano's contention that the intrastate phone calls between Giordano and Jones did not constitute criminal acts under 18 U.S.C. § 2425 for the reasons set forth in the published opinion that accompanies this Order, See United.”
United States v. Brian Jeremiah (2005)
“Jeremiah pled guilty to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 for using interstate commerce to transmit information about a minor.”
United States v. James Neuenkirk (2025)
““[I]nformation” under 18 U.S.C. § 2425 includes the minor’s name or address.”
United States v. Stephen Luxford (2014)
“PER CURIAM: * Stephen Randall Luxford was convicted of use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 , and he was sentenced to an imprisonment term of 60 months and 10 years of supervised release.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Witmayer, M. (2020)
“§2424 (relating to filing factual statement about alien individual); 18 U.S.C. §2425 (relating to use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor); a comparable military offense or similar offense under the laws of another jurisdiction or foreign country or…”
United States v. Eychaner (2018)
“§ 2423 (transportation of minors); 18 U.S.C. § 2425 (use of interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor); 18 U.”
United States v. Philip A. Giordano (2023)
“§§ 371 and 2425; and (3) fifteen counts of transmitting via telephone the names of the minor victims with intent to entice, encourage, offer, and solicit illegal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . Giordano was tried before a jury and, on March 25, 2003, was 2…”
Jimmy Cobb v. United States (2024)
“PER CURIAM: Jimmy Cobb is currently serving a five-year supervised re- lease term, following his 24-month prison sentence for using inter- state facilities to transmit information about a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . Proceeding pro se, Cobb appeals the district…”
Giordano v. United States (2020)
“§§ 371 and 2425; and eleven counts of substantive violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 , each alleging a particular transmission via telephone of the name of a victim with intent to entice, encourage, offer and solicit illegal sexual activity.”
Kelly-Castillo v. United States (2022)
“About a Minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . CR–404, Dkt. 12. On September 21, 2020, Kelly-Castillo appeared before the Magistrate Judge Candy W.”
Jordan Michael Drake v. United States of America (2026)
“§2422 (b), and Attempted Use of Interstate Facilities to Transmit Information about a Minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . CR-402, Dkt. 17. In April of 2021, a jury convicted Drake of both Counts in the indictment.”
United States v. Turner (2009)
“Defendant-Appellant Mark Turner pled guilty to two counts of interstate transmission of information about a minor with the intent to entice the minor to engage in illegal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . The advisory sentencing guidelines range for Turner was…”
United States v. Jimmy Graham (2015)
“Jimmy Dale Graham directly appeals the judgment imposed by the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of using interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 . In a brief filed under Anders v.”
United States v. Brian Jeremiah (2006)
“Brian Fay Jeremiah pleaded guilty to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2425 (2000) for using interstate facilities to transmit information about a minor "with the intent to entice, encourage, offer, or solicit" criminal sexual activity, and the District Court sentenced Jeremiah to…”
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.