18 U.S.C. § 880
Receiving the proceeds of extortion
A person who receives, possesses, conceals, or disposes of any money or other property which was obtained from the commission of any offense under this chapter that is punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, knowing the same to have been unlawfully obtained, shall be imprisoned not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: United States v. Edgar Lemus
United States v. Edgar Lemus (2024)
“§ 371 ; aiding and abetting the receipt of the proceeds of extortion under 18 U.S.C. §§ 880 , 2(a); and receiving the proceeds of extortion under § 880.”
Acevedo v. Cerame (2015)
“18 U.S.C. § 880 illegal Extortion Count II: DAVID J.”
United States v. Nygul Anderson (2019)
“21 18 U.S.C. § 880 . 22 Id. § 371. 23 Ocasio v.”
United States v. Grewal (1998)
“On June 6, 1997, Vasile pled guilty to a one-count information charging that he violated 18 U.S.C. § 880 2 by, between the approximate dates of October 20, 1996, and November 6, 1996, conspiring to receive and possess money obtained by extortion.”
United States v. Damti (2004)
“Damti was separately convicted of one count of receiving the proceeds of extortion in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 880 . Yosef was separately convicted of two counts of extortion via interstate communication in violation of 18 U.”
Barbara Stuart Robinson v. Fremont Hotel and Casino (2025)
“99 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 880 . Her First Amended Complaint appears to be the same as her 8 original complaint and she again brings a single cause of action pursuant to 18 U.”
United States v. Edgar Lemus (2024)
“§ 371 and aiding and abetting the possession of proceeds of extortion in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 880 , § 2(a). Lemus was also convicted of possession of proceeds of extortion in violation of 18 U.”
Lopez v. COMPA Industries, Inc. (2024)
“Interstate Communications; (iv) 18 U.S.C. § 880 . Receiving the proceeds of extortion; (v) 18 U.”
United States v. Ghalashahi (2004)
“§ 875 (d); and receiving proceeds of extortion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 880 . He appeals from that conviction, contending that the district court erred when it reserved its ruling on his motion for judgment of acquittal under Fed.”
United States v. Teofil Brank (2018)
“§ 1952 (a)(3); and two counts of receiving proceeds of extortion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 880 . He also appeals his sentence.”
Monument City Rentals, LLC v. Thompson-Mckoy (2024)
“§ 242 ), and receiving proceeds of extortion ( 18 U.S.C. § 880 ). Defendant offers no explanation as to how any of the criminal statutes apply to the facts of this civil action.”
McKind v. U.S. Bank National Association (2023)
“2015) (no private right of action under 18 U.S.C. § 880 ). Further, the Court finds Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a plausible claim for the same reasons the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s prior complaint relating to the foreclosure.”
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.