18 U.S.C. § 480
Possessing counterfeit foreign obligations or securities
Whoever, within the United States, knowingly and with intent to defraud, possesses or delivers any false, forged, or counterfeit bond, certificate, obligation, security, treasury note, bill, promise to pay, bank note, or bill issued by a bank or corporation of any foreign country, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2021 · leading case: United States v. Schlei
United States v. Schlei (1997)
“§ 479 ; (2) to possess and deliver false and counterfeit foreign bank notes in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 480 ; (3) to use interstate wires in execution of scheme to defraud in violation of 18 U.”
Wasman v. United States (1984)
“Thereafter, pursuant to negotiations between petitioner and the Government, the Government dismissed the mail fraud indictment and substituted a one-count information charging petitioner with possession of counterfeit certificates of deposit, in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 480 .…”
United States v. Warren S. Chang (2000)
“§ 479 (“Count Two”); and (3) possessing a counterfeit foreign obligation or security, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 480 (“Count Three”). These charges resulted from the two men’s activities relating to a particular *1171 Japanese “Certificate of Payback Balance” with a face amount…”
Leonard Joseph Lamagna v. United States (1981)
“While appellant contended that his offense was properly punishable under 18 U.S.C. § 480 (possessing counterfeit foreign obligations or securities), which provides for a maximum of one year imprisonment and/or a fine of $1,000, *779 he overlooks § 478 which provides a penalty of…”
United States v. Gordon M. Kenngott (1987)
“In turn, the relevant counterfeiting statute covering obligations issued by a bank of a foreign government (now codified at 18 U.S.C. § 480 ) prohibited the possession or delivery of “false, forged or counterfeit” obligations.”
William Herrmann v. Edwin Meese, Iii, Attorney General, Robert Honsted, Warden (1988)
“He contends that the United States offense most similar to the one for which he was convicted in England is 18 U.S.C. § 480 (1982) (relating to possession of foreign counterfeit currency; one-year maximum sentence) rather than 18 U.”
STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. LEONARD K. COLEMAN (17-04-0500, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (2021)
“" See 18 USCS § 480. Accordingly, we reject defendant's belated challenge to the legal sufficiency of the fourth-degree obstruction charge here, where defendant's actions obstructed the detection of counterfeit currency secreted in his shorts, notwithstanding the State's failure…”
United States v. Lee Tai-Hsing (1990)
“Jen Kuo-Sen argues that section 2315, under which he is charged, is an example of a proscription duplicitous with 18 U.S.C. § 480 . Jen Kuo-Sen asserts that the mandate of the due process clause of the United States Constitution concerning vague statutes and unlimited…”
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.