United States v. Johnnie Traxler
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16246
| 5th Cir. | 2014Background
- Traxler, an NLAR association executive (Aug 2008–Oct 2010), made repeated unauthorized personal purchases on NLAR credit accounts beginning summer 2009.
- The fraud spanned over a year, producing estimated losses of $66,966.25, including $32,585 to NLAR; NLAR continued to receive and pay card statements until an audit discovered the scheme.
- Indictment charged Traxler with mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, alleging that mailed credit-card statements (including one showing a personal Dish Network charge) were part of the scheme.
- Traxler moved to dismiss for lack of federal jurisdiction, arguing the mailing was a routine post‑fraud statement (a Parr-style “scheme completed before mailing” argument).
- District court denied the motion; Traxler pleaded guilty conditionally, preserving the jurisdictional issue on appeal. The court sentenced her to 15 months and ordered restitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether use of the mails satisfied § 1341 jurisdictional element | Gov: mailings were incident to an ongoing scheme and necessary for its continuation | Traxler: scheme was complete when purchases were made; mailed statements were routine and post‑fraud (Parr) | Affirmed: mailings were part of an ongoing scheme; jurisdiction exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (mailing need only be incident to or a step in executing a scheme)
- Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1 (defendant may "cause" mailings or foresee their ordinary use)
- Parr v. United States, 363 U.S. 370 (mailing insufficient when scheme reached fruition before mailings)
- Kann v. United States, 323 U.S. 88 (mailings immaterial where defendants received proceeds before mailings)
- Maze v. United States, 414 U.S. 395 (no jurisdiction where scheme reached fruition pre‑mailing)
- Mills v. United States, 199 F.3d 184 (5th Cir.) (ongoing fraudulent venture where continued deception and payments via mail were integral)
- Bieganowski v. United States, 313 F.3d 264 (5th Cir.) (elements of mail fraud)
- Jacobs v. Nat'l Drug Intelligence Ctr., 548 F.3d 375 (5th Cir.) (panel precedent and rule of orderliness)