## Facts

- The United States charged Gerald Phillips, Jamie Dwyer, Luisa Cardaropoli, and Giuseppe Polimeni with multiple federal offenses, including wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343.
- The wire-fraud counts were based on specified telephone and facsimile communications alleged to have furthered a fraudulent scheme.
- At trial, the government did not offer evidence that any charged wire communication actually crossed a state line (or otherwise traveled in foreign commerce).
- The government instead argued that proof of actual interstate travel was unnecessary because the defendants used wire facilities (telephone/fax) that operate as part of an integrated interstate communications network.
- Consistent with the government’s position, the court instructed the jury that the interstate-commerce element could be satisfied without proof that the specific transmissions crossed state or international boundaries, so long as the facility used was part of an integrated interstate commerce network.
- The jury convicted the defendants on the wire-fraud counts (and on other counts not dependent on § 1343’s interstate/foreign commerce element).
- After the verdicts, the defendants filed post-conviction motions, including motions for judgment of acquittal, arguing that § 1343 required proof that the charged transmissions themselves were “in interstate or foreign commerce” and that the government’s proof fell short.

## Issues

1. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, must the government prove that the specific wire communications charged in the indictment were transmitted “in interstate or foreign commerce,” rather than proving only that the defendants used a communications facility connected to an interstate network?
2. If § 1343 requires proof of an interstate or foreign transmission, were the evidence and the jury instruction insufficient so that the wire-fraud convictions could not stand?

## Decision

- The court granted the defendants’ motions for judgment of acquittal on the wire-fraud counts.
- The court held that § 1343 requires proof that the wire communication itself was transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce.
- Because the government presented no evidence that the charged transmissions crossed state or international boundaries, and because the jury was instructed it could convict without that proof, the wire-fraud convictions were set aside.
- The court denied the defendants’ remaining post-conviction challenges on other counts.

## Legal Principles

- 18 U.S.C. § 1343 applies only when the defendant transmits, or causes the transmission of, a wire communication “in interstate or foreign commerce” for the purpose of executing a scheme to defraud.
- The statute’s interstate/foreign commerce element attaches to the particular transmission charged, not merely to the general character of the phone or fax network used.
- A jury instruction that permits conviction without requiring proof of every statutory element is legal error; when the trial record lacks evidence of the missing element, judgment of acquittal is required on that count.
- Legislative proposals that would have amended § 1343 to reach mere “use” of a facility of interstate commerce (rather than an interstate/foreign transmission) support reading the enacted text as requiring an interstate or foreign transmission.

## Conclusion

United States v. Phillips holds that the wire-fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, requires proof that the specific wire communications charged were transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce; because the government offered no such proof and the jury was instructed it could convict based only on use of a communications network connected to interstate commerce, the court entered judgments of acquittal on the wire-fraud counts while leaving the other convictions intact.


United States v. Phillips, 376 F. Supp. 2d 6 (2005)