means of identification question

[javajoe7]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA but this is a federal crime question so that doesnt matter here.
I've been charged with aggravated identity theft (among other related charges) but this charge is the one that can put me in jail for two years as its a mandatory 2 years so im trying to see if i have a good defense to it. The law on this charge says uses, transfers, or possesses a "MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION.
So my question is, can i argue that a social security number is NOT a means of identitfication and was NEVER INTENDED to have that purpose. Since my alleged crime was typing in social security numbers on applications and not applying in person, and not using a drivers license or any identitfication like that, i think i may have a good defense here. my lawyer isnt sure if a social security number is a means of identitfication so if anyone knows any case law concerning this, please mention it. thanks.

 

[Antigone*]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA but this is a federal crime question so that doesnt matter here.
I've been charged with aggravated identity theft (among other related charges) but this charge is the one that can put me in jail for two years as its a mandatory 2 years so im trying to see if i have a good defense to it. The law on this charge says uses, transfers, or possesses a "MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION.
So my question is, can i argue that a social security number is NOT a means of identitfication and was NEVER INTENDED to have that purpose. Since my alleged crime was typing in social security numbers on applications and not applying in person, and not using a drivers license or any identitfication like that, i think i may have a good defense here. my lawyer isnt sure if a social security number is a means of identitfication so if anyone knows any case law concerning this, please mention it. thanks.

You'd lose that argument.

 

[javajoe7]

antigone of greece,state ur reasoning fool

all antigone said with his condescending attitude was "id lose that argument"
who are u god???
social security numbers are NOT meant to be means of identitification and you know that.
can anymore state any case law or have a VALID POINT with reasoning behind it, unlike antigone of greece. (shaking my head)

 

[Zigner]

all antigone said with his condescending attitude was "id lose that argument"
who are u god???
social security numbers are NOT meant to be means of identitification and you know that.
can anymore state any case law or have a VALID POINT with reasoning behind it, unlike antigone of greece. (shaking my head)

I agree with antigone.

 

[Zigner]

Intended or not...Social Security numbers HAVE become a means of identification.

 

[john39]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA but this is a federal crime question so that doesnt matter here.
I've been charged with aggravated identity theft (among other related charges) but this charge is the one that can put me in jail for two years as its a mandatory 2 years so im trying to see if i have a good defense to it. The law on this charge says uses, transfers, or possesses a "MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION.
So my question is, can i argue that a social security number is NOT a means of identitfication and was NEVER INTENDED to have that purpose. Since my alleged crime was typing in social security numbers on applications and not applying in person, and not using a drivers license or any identitfication like that, i think i may have a good defense here. my lawyer isnt sure if a social security number is a means of identitfication so if anyone knows any case law concerning this, please mention it. thanks.

why do you say that?



18 U.S.C. § 1028

(7) the term “means of identification” means any name or number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual, including any—
(A) name, social security number, date of birth, official State or government issued driver’s license or identification number, alien registration number, government passport number, employer or taxpayer identification number;


Of course it is means of identification.Every individual has a different one.

 

[Antigone*]

all antigone said with his condescending attitude was "id lose that argument"
who are u god???
social security numbers are NOT meant to be means of identitification and you know that.
can anymore state any case law or have a VALID POINT with reasoning behind it, unlike antigone of greece. (shaking my head)

Antigone is a she, and no she is not a goddess; but Proserpina is.

If an SSN is not a means of identification, then what the heck is it? You provide case law showing me that it is not a means of identification.

How does the IRS identify you?

 

[john39]

case law case law -what if there is no case law?

 

[john39]

Your user name and password when you logged here,are means of identification also

 

[CdwJava]

While a person's SSN is not generally a valid form of identification when used alone to affirm the identity of an individual, it is a form of personal identification as the number is unique to an individual. And, as was pointed out by john39, federal statutes seem to spell out that a SSN is, indeed, a means of identification under federal law.

 

[asiny]

case law case law -what if there is no case law?

Just because no-one can FIND any case law does not mean you did not use someones governmental issued identification number illegally - as per john39's listing of what constitutes as identification.

my lawyer isnt sure if a social security number is a means of identitfication so if anyone knows any case law concerning this, please mention it. thanks.

Get another lawyer who knows how to do research.

 

[john39]

Just because no-one can FIND any case law does not mean you did not use someones governmental issued identification number illegally - as per john39's listing of what constitutes as identification.

what are you talking about? I don't understand . tell me

javajoe7 said

this is a federal crime question so that doesnt matter here.
I've been charged with aggravated identity theft

I said,look here:

Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information

18 U.S.C. § 1028

(7) the term “means of identification” means any name or number that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual, including any—
(A) name, social security number, date of birth, official State or government issued driver’s license or identification number, alien registration number, government passport number, employer or taxpayer identification number;

If your argument is that abuse of usage of soc. sec. no. as a means of identification, occurs,then take that argument with the ones that you allege abuse its usage.

abuse does not take away use, i.e., is not an argument against proper use

translation - if SSN is not intended to be means of identification for certain usages ,does not mean that it is not intended to be considered means of identification at all.It is means for identification for the purpose of the law quoted.



Abusus non tollit usum: Abuse does not exclude usage


For the situation ,as circumstances dictate ,E re nata - the 18 U.S.C. § 1028 code quoted applies.

And,you see I underlined the word intended? I did because ,like Zigner said,even if it wasn't indented for that,it has become that.

And yes OP go get another lawyer etc.that is always good recommendation

 

[asiny]

what are you talking about? I don't understand . tell me
Plus lots of other words

I was agreeing with you and quoting you for truth

The OP was claiming that if there was no case law - then does the charge hold weight.

My point was that regardless of the fact no-one has quoted any case law, it does not mean the OP did not illegally use another persons governmental issued identification number.

Sorry if my response caused confusion.

 

[john39]

I was agreeing with you and quoting you for truth

The OP was claiming that if there was no case law - then does the charge hold weight.

My point was that regardless of the fact no-one has quoted any case law, it does not mean the OP did not illegally use another persons governmental issued identification number.

Sorry if my response caused confusion.

Uh... ok,thanks I am not used to that here so I don't recognize it even when it happens