State v. RamirezState v. Ramirez
¶ 1. Alfrеdo Ramirez appeals from a judgment of conviction for misappropriating the personal identifying information of another pursuant to
¶2. The facts are brief and undisputed. At all times relevant to this case, Ramirez was an illegal resident of the United States and did not have a social security number. On September 2, 1997, Ramirez obtained employment at Trek Bike in Walworth county. On June 4, 1999, a human resources manager at Trek Bike reported to the police that a list of people with corresponding social security numbers had been discovered in the desk of a former employee who had been fired. One of the social security numbers was listed to a Jose Ramirеz. A check with the social security administration revealed that this social security number was actually assigned to Benjamin Wulfen-stein of Elko, Nevada. In an interview with the police, Ramirez stated that Jose Ramirez was his cousin and that Jose had sent him the social security card two years earlier. Ramirez admitted that he had used Wulfenstein's social security number when he applied for employment at Trek Bike. Trek Bike terminated Ramirez on July 6,1999.
¶ 3. Based on this information, the State charged Ramirez with intentionally misappropriating the personal identifying information оf an individual to obtain a thing of value without the individual's consent pursuant to
¶ 4. Relying on the fact that
¶ 5. Ramirez contends that
¶ 6. Ramirez raises two closely related ex post facto arguments. First, he contends that even if
¶ 8. That brings us to Ramirez's second ex post facto argument, thаt Wis. STAT.
¶ 9. In John, our supreme court quoted the United States Supreme Court's decision in Toussie when addressing the criteria for determining whether a particular statute creates a continuing offense:
These considerations do not mean that a particular offense should never be construed as a continuing one. They do, however, require that such a result should not be reached unless the explicit language of the substantive criminal statute compels such a conclusion or the nature of the crime involved is such that. . .[the legislature] must assuredly have intended that it he treated as a continuing one. Tous-sie v. United States, 397 U.S. at 115 .
John,
¶ 10. Wisconsin Stat.
¶ 11. The first, third and fourth elements of this offense are not germane to the "continuing offense" issue in this case. Ramirez concedes that he intentionally used Wulfenstein's social security number to conceal his illegal resident status and his true identity in order to obtain employment at Trek Bike and that he did so without Wulfenstein's consent or authorization. Rather, it is the second element that lies at the heart of this case. This element requires that the defendant "obtain credit, money, goods, services or anything else of vаlue."
¶ 12. While WlS. Stat.
¶ 13. In
John,
the welfare fraud statute еxpressly spoke to a situation where the defendant "continues to receive assistance."
John,
¶ 14. However, WlS. Stat.
¶ 15. We therefore conclude that the statute is ambiguous as to whether it creates a continuing offense. In that situаtion, we must ascertain the legislative intent from the language of the statute in relation to its scope, history, context, subject matter and object intended to be accomplished.
Roehl,
With just a few key information coordinates, a crook can start phone service in your name, open charge cards, take over your existing credit lines and change the аddress on hijacked accounts so statements go to a mail drop.
The actual number of consumers affected and volume of loss have increased, however, as the industry surges toward $2 trillion a year in transactions. Incidents of identity fraud — the kind that leaves consumers most helрless — were reported at one major company to have risen 540% in the U.S. during the first half of 1995, and industrywide it isestimated to account for as much as $90 million of the $1.5 billion written off as card fraud losses, according to various industry sources.
Patrie Hedlund, Identity Crisis, L.A. Times, Mar. 11, 1997.
¶ 16. This history reveals that
¶ 17. From this it follows that Ramirez's conduct in this case violated
CONCLUSION
¶ 18. We hold that Ramirez obtained money in the form of wages, not merely the opportunity for employment, as the result of his unauthorized use of Wulfenstein's personal identifying information. We also hold that
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.
Notes
All references to the Wisсonsin Statutes are to the 1999-2000 version.
Wisconsin Stat.
Whoever intentionally uses or attempts to use any personal identifying information or personal identification document of an individual to obtain credit, money, goods, services or anything else of value without the authorization or consent of the individual and by representing that he or she is the individual or is acting with the authorization or consent of the individual is guilty of a Class D felony.
We could invoke the guilty plea/waiver rule against Ramirez since he pled guilty to the charge after the trial court rejected his constitutional challenge.
See State v. Schroeder,
Those considerations prompt us to not invoke the guilty plea/waiver rulе in this case. Not only have the parties fully briefed the issue on appeal, but they also litigated the issue in the trial court. In addition, the question of whether WlS. Stat.
Article I, section 12 of the Wisconsin Constitution stаtes, "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed, and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate."
An ex post facto law also includes a law which "inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime at the time it was committed ... or which alters the situation of the accused to his disadvantage."
State v. Thiel,