United States v. Harrison
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2004 WL 2884310 (2004)
- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
Veronica Harrison (defendant) worked for the New York City Human Resources Administration. Her job was to help locate child-support services for children and mothers on public assistance. As part of her job, Harrison had access to names, social-security numbers, and other identifying information for thousands of people. In 1999, Harrison was introduced to Lovelace Adusei Kontoh, who was involved in a conspiracy to obtain confidential identifying information about people without their knowledge or permission and then use that information to file fraudulent tax returns to collect refund checks. Kontoh and his conspirators defrauded the United States out of at least $7,000,000. Harrison began helping Kontoh. She met with him 25 to 30 times over the course of a few years to provide him with social-security numbers and other identifying information for at least 16,000 people. Kontoh paid her $50 to $60 for the information at each meeting. Harrison was arrested and, after waiving her Miranda rights, told police that she provided Kontoh with this information so he could use the identities to file fraudulent tax returns. Harrison was indicted for one count of identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7), and the court held a bench trial. Harrison stipulated to several facts prior to trial but argued that the government failed to show that she intended to aid or abet Kontoh, a necessary element of the crime.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pauley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.