U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 42— EXTORTIONATE CREDIT TRANSACTIONS

18 U.S.C. § 892

Making extortionate extensions of credit

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Whoever makes any extortionate extension of credit, or conspires to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.(b) In any prosecution under this section, if it is shown that all of the following factors were present in connection with the extension of credit in question, there is prima facie evidence that the extension of credit was extortionate, but this subsection is nonexclusive and in no way limits the effect or applicability of subsection (a):(1) The repayment of the extension of credit, or the performance of any promise given in consideration thereof, would be unenforceable, through civil judicial processes against the debtor(A) in the jurisdiction within which the debtor, if a natural person, resided or(B) in every jurisdiction within which the debtor, if other than a natural person, was incorporated or qualified to do businessat the time the extension of credit was made.(2) The extension of credit was made at a rate of interest in excess of an annual rate of 45 per centum calculated according to the actuarial method of allocating payments made on a debt between principal and interest, pursuant to which a payment is applied first to the accumulated interest and the balance is applied to the unpaid principal.(3) At the time the extension of credit was made, the debtor reasonably believed that either(A) one or more extensions of credit by the creditor had been collected or attempted to be collected by extortionate means, or the nonrepayment thereof had been punished by extortionate means; or(B) the creditor had a reputation for the use of extortionate means to collect extensions of credit or to punish the nonrepayment thereof.(4) Upon the making of the extension of credit, the total of the extensions of credit by the creditor to the debtor then outstanding, including any unpaid interest or similar charges, exceeded $100.(c) In any prosecution under this section, if evidence has been introduced tending to show the existence of any of the circumstances described in subsection (b)(1) or (b)(2), and direct evidence of the actual belief of the debtor as to the creditor’s collection practices is not available, then for the purpose of showing the understanding of the debtor and the creditor at the time the extension of credit was made, the court may in its discretion allow evidence to be introduced tending to show the reputation as to collection practices of the creditor in any community of which the debtor was a member at the time of the extension.(Added Pub. L. 90–321, title II, § 202(a), May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 160; amended Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $10,000”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 154 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: United States v. Ilario M.A. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Ilario M.A. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1990). · cites it 6× “§ 1955 (relating, respectively, to poker games and barbooth gambling), and a third accusing him of making an extortionate extension of credit to Smoot in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 (a). Appellant was convicted on all three counts.”
United States v. Lombardozzi, 491 F.3d 61 (2d Cir. 2007). · cites it 6× “Count 7 charged him with conspiring to make an extortionate extension of credit in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 ; Count 8 charged him with the substantive offense of making an extortionate extension of credit in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Frank Oreto, Sr., United States of Am. v. Frank Oreto, Jr., United States of Am. v. Dennis Petrosino, 37 F.3d 739 (1st Cir. 1994). · cites it 7× “18 U.S.C. §§ 892 , 894 (the extortionate credit *743 transactions or “ETC” statute).”
United States v. Vito Spillone, United States of Am. v. John Clyde Abel, United States of Am. v. Frank Citro, 879 F.2d 514 (9th Cir. 1989). · cites it 5× “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 892 , 894 (1982). He was convicted on all counts and sentenced to serve ten years and pay a $20,000 fine.”
United States v. Ernest Allen, AKA 1-95-M-1426-01, 127 F.3d 260 (2d Cir. 1997). · cites it 9× “JACOBS, Circuit Judge: Ernest Alen appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York convicting him, following a jury trial, of making two extortionate extensions of credit in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 (a). On appeal, Alen claims…”
United States v. Francis Curcio, Gus Curcio, Dahill D'OnOfriO & Roberto Garcia, 712 F.2d 1532 (2d Cir. 1983). · cites it 7× “other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation and property of the debtors and others, and would demand weekly interest payments known as “vigorish” or “vig” payments which would extend the term of the loans, with the understanding of the defendants and the debtors…”
United States v. Willie H. Dennis, 625 F.2d 782 (8th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “Dennis appeals his conviction 1 on twelve counts of an eighteen-count indictment charging seventeen violations of the Extortionate Credit Transactions Act (ECT), 18 U.S.C. §§ 892 , 894 (1976) and one obstruction of justice under 18 U.”
United States v. Gennaro J. Angiulo, Donato F. Angiulo, Samuel S. Granito, Francesco J. Angiulo & Michele A. Angiulo, 897 F.2d 1169 (1st Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “§ 1955 ; two counts of conspiring to make an extortionate extension of credit, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 (a); ■ conspiring to collect, and collecting, an extortionate extension of credit, in violation of 18 U.”
Accardo v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 634 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 2011). · cites it 5× “” The Board concluded that a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 (a) is categorically a crime of violence.”
United States v. Steven Madori, Charles Chiapetta, 419 F.3d 159 (2d Cir. 2005). · cites it 3× “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 892 , 894 and 371. He attacks his loansharking conviction principally on the ground that the government adduced insufficient proof that he was party to an understanding that force would be used to collect the loans.”
United States v. Persico, 621 F. Supp. 842 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). · cites it 4× “, 18 U.S.C. § 892 (loansharking agreement), id.”
United States v. Edward T. Perrotta, 289 F.3d 155 (1st Cir. 2002). · cites it 7× “In March of 2000 the grand jury returned a superceding indictment which included the original count against Perrot-ta and also charged that he had conspired with Folco and others to make extortionate extensions of credit to Regine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 892 , and that…”
Show all 154 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 892(a) — 2 cases
United States v. Alphonse Persico, 853 F.2d 134 (2d Cir. 1988).
United States v. Shifman, 124 F.3d 31 (1st Cir. 1997).
— 18 U.S.C. § 892(b) — 1 case
United States v. Vito Spillone, United States of Am. v. John Clyde Abel, United States of Am. v. Frank Citro, 879 F.2d 514 (9th Cir. 1989). “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 892 , 894 (1982). He was convicted on all counts and sentenced to serve ten years and pay a $20,000 fine.”
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.