18 U.S.C. § 28
Human trafficking defense
(a)Definitions.—In this section—(1) the term “covered Federal offense” means a level A offense or level B offense, as those terms are defined in section 3771A; and(2) the term “victim of trafficking” has the meaning given the term in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102).(b)Duress.—In a prosecution for a covered Federal offense, a defendant may establish duress by demonstrating that the defendant was a victim of trafficking at the time at which the defendant committed the offense.(c)Record or Proceeding Under Seal.—In any proceeding in which a defense under subsection (b) is raised, any record or part of the proceeding related to the defense shall, on motion, be placed under seal until such time as a conviction is entered for the offense.(d)Post-Conviction Relief.—A failure to assert, or failed assertion of, a defense under subsection (b) by an individual who is convicted of a covered Federal offense may not preclude the individual from asserting as a mitigating factor, at sentencing or in a proceeding for any post-conviction relief, that at the time of the commission of the offense, the defendant was a victim of trafficking and committed the offense under duress.(e)Federal Aid.—A failure to assert, or failed assertion of, a defense under subsection (b) by an individual who is convicted of a covered Federal offense may not be used for the purpose of disqualifying the individual from participating in any federally funded program that aids victims of trafficking.(Added Pub. L. 119–73, § 6(a), Jan. 23, 2026, 139 Stat. 2009.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesRule of ConstructionPub. L. 119–73, § 8, Jan. 23, 2026, 139 Stat. 2010, provided that: “Nothing in this Act [see Short Title of 2026 Amendment note set out under section 1 of this title], or the amendments made by this Act, may be construed to conflict with any of the crime victims’ rights described in section 3771 of title 18, United States Code.”
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases, 1944–2014 · leading case:
Coffin v. Reichard, 143 F.2d 443 (6th Cir. 1944).
Coffin v. Reichard, 143 F.2d 443 (6th Cir. 1944).
“It appears from the petition that on February 27, 1942, petitioner was indicted in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Western Division, for a violation of Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 28 , and on March 11, 1942, he plead guilty to the indictment and…”
United States v. Ute Jarlik Bell, 585 F. App'x 552 (9th Cir. 2014).
“MEMORANDUM * Defendant Ute Christine Jarlik Bell appeals from her jury conviction for making false, fictitious, and fraudulent claims to the United States Treasury under 18 U.S.C. § 28 ,7. 1. Defendant first contends that the district court erred in admitting evidence of two…”
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.