Skip to main content
Top Button
Tim Belevetz Quoted in <i>Law360</i>: "High Court Bank Fraud Case Hinges on Account Ownership" Tim Belevetz Quoted in <i>Law360</i>: "High Court Bank Fraud Case Hinges on Account Ownership"

Tim Belevetz Quoted in Law360: "High Court Bank Fraud Case Hinges on Account Ownership"

Timothy Belevetz was quoted in the Law360 article, "High Court Bank Fraud Case Hinges on Account Ownership."

The article included: 

The case, Shaw v. United States, centers on the question of whether prosecutors were correct to bring claims under the prong of the 1984 Bank Fraud Act requiring that they prove that an alleged criminal intended to defraud a bank when going after a depositor's account. One of the key questions to be answered is which party — the depositor or the bank — is the legal owner of funds once they are deposited and thus the victim in a fraud scheme targeting such an account, said Tim Belevetz, a former federal prosecutor.

Lawrence Eugene Shaw, the California man convicted of 14 counts of bank fraud bringing the appeal, argues that because the ultimate victim in the case was an individual account holder and not Bank of America Corp., where the account was housed, a jury incorrectly convicted him and the Ninth Circuit wrongly upheld that conviction.

But if the U.S. government is able to convincingly argue that Bank of America was the legal owner of the deposits, the conviction should stand, Belevetz said.

"If that argument were to be made and were to gain some traction, then it is conceivable that the law, as is written, would be just fine," he said.


Click here to read the full article.
View Full Site View Mobile Optimized