Receiving or selling stolen goods may seem like a straightforward offense, but at the federal level, the crime of fencing under 18 U.S.C. Section 2315 carries serious consequences. Federal jurisdiction is triggered whenever stolen goods cross state lines or enter interstate commerce, transforming what might otherwise be a state-level offense into a federal case with substantial penalties.

What Does Section 2315 Cover?

Section 2315 makes it a federal crime to receive, possess, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any goods, wares, merchandise, securities, or money that have been stolen, converted, or taken by fraud from interstate commerce, when the value of the property exceeds five thousand dollars. The statute also covers unlawfully converted goods, meaning the property does not have to be stolen in the traditional sense. It covers goods that were obtained through fraud or other unlawful conversion as well.

The Interstate Commerce Requirement

Federal jurisdiction under Section 2315 depends on the government proving that the stolen goods moved in or affected interstate commerce. In practice, this threshold is easy for prosecutors to meet. Goods manufactured in one state and sold in another, items shipped across state lines, or property that crossed an international border all qualify. Federal courts have interpreted the interstate commerce element broadly, and prosecutors rarely struggle to establish it.

A conviction under Section 2315 carries a maximum sentence of ten years in federal prison. When the offense involves organized retail crime or goods valued in the millions of dollars, prosecutors may also pursue conspiracy charges under 18 U.S.C. Section 371, stacking additional exposure on top of the base offense. Restitution to victims and civil liability are also common outcomes.

How the Sigal Law Group Can Help

The government must prove that the defendant knew the goods were stolen. This knowledge element is central to the prosecution, and it is often the most contested issue at trial. A person who purchased discounted merchandise without reason to know it was stolen is not guilty under the statute. Evidence of the defendant's awareness, the circumstances of the transaction, the price paid, and any representations made by sellers all factor into this analysis.

At Sigal Law Group, we work to expose weaknesses in the government's case and protect our clients from unjust prosecutions. Contact us today for a free, confidential consultation.