In the Courts

On June 11, 2012, in United States v. Kieffer, 681 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 6/11/12), the Tenth Circuit held that testimony by website end-users in two different states was sufficient proof that “a transmission in interstate commerce” occurred, as required for conviction under the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C.
' 1343. The case involved false statements, contempt of court and wire-fraud allegations against defendant Howard Kieffer, a now somewhat notorious criminal defense “attorney” who practiced law without a license, representing scores of individuals as a trial and post-trial advocate and gaining admission to federal trial and appellate courts across the country despite never having attended law school or sat for any bar examination.

In 2009, a North Dakota jury convicted Kieffer of mail fraud and making false statements. He was sentenced to 51 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay $152,750 in restitution. Kieffer was subsequently convicted of false statements, contempt of court and wire fraud in the District of Colorado. He was sentenced to 51 months' imprisonment, to be served consecutively to his North Dakota sentence, as well as being fined an additional $152,019 for restitution to victims in Colorado. On appeal, Kieffer presented several challenges to both the conviction and his sentence. Of particular note, Keiffer argued that his wire-fraud conviction was legally insufficient because the government failed to prove that the Internet communications at issue traveled in interstate commerce.