## Facts

- Veronica Harrison worked for the New York City Human Resources Administration, helping locate child-support services for children and mothers receiving public assistance.
- Through 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 without victims’ knowledge or permission and use it to file fraudulent federal tax returns seeking refund checks.
- Kontoh and his co-conspirators defrauded the United States of at least $7,000,000 through the scheme.
- Harrison began assisting Kontoh by providing Social Security numbers and other identifiers.
- Over the course of a few years, Harrison met with Kontoh about 25 to 30 times.
- Across those meetings, Harrison provided identifying information for at least 16,000 people.
- Kontoh paid Harrison about $50 to $60 at each meeting in exchange for the information.
- After her arrest, Harrison waived her Miranda rights and told law enforcement that she provided the identifying information so Kontoh could use it to file fraudulent tax returns.

## Issues

1. Whether, on the bench-trial record, the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Harrison acted with the intent required by 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7), including intent to aid or abet Kontoh’s unlawful use of the identifiers.

## Decision

- Harrison was indicted in the Southern District of New York on one count of identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7).
- The case was tried to the court (bench trial).
- Before trial, Harrison stipulated to several facts but contested whether the government proved the statute’s intent element (arguing the evidence did not show she intended to aid or abet Kontoh).
- The court issued its decision in an unpublished opinion reported at 2004 WL 2884310 (2004).

## Legal Principles

- 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7) prohibits knowingly transferring, possessing, or using another person’s means of identification without lawful authority, when done with intent to commit, aid or abet, or in connection with specified unlawful activity.
- In a criminal bench trial, the government must prove each element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt, including any disputed mens rea element.
- Intent may be proven through circumstantial evidence, including repeated conduct, the volume of identifiers involved, payment arrangements, and post-arrest statements made after a valid Miranda waiver.

## Conclusion

United States v. Harrison concerns an SDNY prosecution of a public employee who repeatedly sold large quantities of confidential identifying information to a participant in a tax-refund fraud conspiracy; although many factual points were not disputed, the central question for the court was whether the evidence—including the pattern of paid disclosures and Harrison’s post-arrest admission of the intended use—satisfied the intent requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7).


United States v. Harrison, 2004 WL 2884310 (2004)