Grand Larceny of an ATM in New York

What is an ATM theft crime?

An automated teller machine (ATM) theft crime is where someone illegally seeks the monies in an ATM machine for their own profit, whether through theft of ATM contents or the machine itself.

Examples

Here are some ways an individual may commit an ATM theft crime.

A person is in possession of a skimming device and has unexplained funds deposited into his account
A person notices and exposes a flaw of a specific ATM machine to withdraw more funds than that individual would be able to
A person removes a remote ATM and transfers it to their home
A person uses a card other than their own to obtain funds from an ATM, and they are not authorized by the owner of the card to do this
Tampers with an ATM machine to provide funds without using a card
An individual enters a secure network without authorization and tampers with an ATM to allow it to provide funds to the user or another person.

This list is not exhaustive. Essentially, if a person is using illegal means to obtain funds from an ATM, it will be an ATM crime.

If you or a loved one has been charged with an ATM theft crime, please call one of our offices today. We have dedicated and experienced attorneys who will help you understand the nature of the charges brought against you and how to be best represented in your current situation.

What are the ATM theft crime laws in New York?

New York’s laws concerning ATM theft crimes fall under grand larceny. Grand larceny is where the property is stolen that exceeds 1,000 dollars is specifically listed in the law as an item, when stolen, it is considered grand larceny.

Grand larceny in the third degree

A person commits grand larceny in the third degree when a person steals over 3,000 dollars. However, if the property was an ATM’s contents or an ATM machine itself, regardless of value, it will still be considered grand larceny in the third degree.

For example, Barry notices an infrequently used ATM on the outskirts of town. He notices that it is serviced most of the time on Tuesday nights and it is rarely used before Wednesday morning. He decides to break open into the machine and steal the funds inside.

However, after much tampering, Barry is only able to steal 400 dollars from the machine. Since this is contents from an ATM, it is considered grand larceny in the third degree instead of grand larceny in the fourth degree, even though the amount stolen does not exceed 3,000 dollars.

This is a class D felony. The penalties associated with this felony are a fine up to 5,000 dollars, or double the amount gained by the crime, and/or up to 7 years in prison. It is important to note that ATM larceny is automatically considered grand larceny in the third degree, if the value exceeds 50,000 dollars or is obtained through extortion, then it is grand larceny in the second degree.

If the value exceeds one million dollars, it will be considered grand larceny in the first degree.⁷ The fines for these crimes are the same as grand larceny in the third degree; however, the penalties can be up to 15 years or 25 years, respectively.

Aggravated grand larceny of an automated teller machine

A person that steals the contents of an ATM or the ATM itself and has a previous conviction of grand larceny in the third degree that is less than 5 years ago, it is aggravated grand larceny of an automated teller machine.

For example, Greg used a crowbar to break into the contents of an ATM. He only receives 1,000 dollars from this activity. Greg was convicted of grand larceny in the third degree for a similar crime 3 years ago. This is aggravated grand larceny of an automated teller machine.

This is a class C felony. The penalties for this are a fine up to 5,000 dollars, or double the amount gained by the crime, and/or up to 15 years in prison.

Any ATM theft will be considered grand larceny in the third degree, and depending on the circumstances an individual may be facing up to 15 years in prison and a fine up to 5,000 dollars or double the amount gained from the theft.

What are other crimes that often accompany a charge of ATM theft?

Grand larceny laws only address the actual theft of monies from the ATM or the ATM itself. However, New York has criminalized many actions that an individual may utilize to commit ATM theft.

The use of technological means to tamper with the ATM’s core functions, accessing the ATM through a secure network and not being authorized, using special equipment to collect data from ATM users, and the use of another’s personal identifying information without that person’s permission – these are all ways that individuals can illegally access the funds of an ATM.

Computer tampering

A person who accesses a computer or a network that they do not have permission, and intentionally changes data or programs, or destroys that data, it is considered computer tampering.

Based on the severity of the tampering (the type of data, repeat offense, damages, etc.), it could range from being computer tampering in the fourth degree, which is a class A misdemeanor, or computer tampering in the first degree, which is a class C felony.

Sample Case

Lisa worked as an ATM technician for a number of years. She was laid off by the company she worked for and became disgruntled. She sought to utilize her experience with ATMs to gain some money. She went to a nearby retail store’s ATM that she had serviced many times in the past.

The store’s management was unaware of Lisa’s layoff and did not question her motives when she asked to perform maintenance on the ATM. She tampers with the machine data, and it allows her to retrieve 10,000 dollars without a card with a simple code on the keypad.

This is computer tampering in the second degree. If she continues to take money past 50,000 dollars, it will be computer tampering in the first degree.

Identity theft

Identity theft is where a person uses the identity of another person for their own benefit, or to the detriment of the person whose identity was stolen. Essentially, if someone uses another person’s identifying information or credit card or similar item to access funds from an ATM, it is considered identity theft.

There are three degrees of offenses associated with identity theft, and it will be considered aggravated identity theft if the identity stolen is a member of the armed forces, and they are deployed. These can range from being a class A misdemeanor to a class D felony.

Sample Case

Tara and Jeff, install skimmer devices on a few ATM keypads in several cities. They track the information of various accounts and amounts withdrawn from these accounts.

After getting large amounts of ATM personal information, Tara and Jeff start to use this information from a variety of locations. They have stolen over 5,000 dollars using this data. They have committed identity theft in the first degree.

Unlawful possession of a skimmer device

Under New York law, if an individual has a skimmer device and intends to use that device to obtain personal identifying information, it will be considered unlawful possession of a skimmer device. There are two degrees of offense and

Sample Case

For example, Tara and Jeff, have been apprehended near an ATM for suspected ATM theft. Jeff had the skimmer device on his person, but it had not been set up at the ATM, and no information had been transmitted. Tara and Jeff admit that the skimmer is theirs, but they had no unlawful motive to use the skimmer.

However, after a warrant is executed and a trove of personal information not belonging to Tara or Jeff is found on their phones, and other electronic devices that were most likely attained from the use of a skimmer, their intent to use the skimmer is implied. This is considered unlawful possession of a skimmer device in the second degree, which is a class A misdemeanor.

Jeff had been previously convicted of grand larceny in the third degree 4 years ago. Jeff can be charged with unlawful possession of a skimmer device in the first degree, which is a class E felony.

What are the common charges that can accompany a charge of ATM theft?

These are common crimes that can occur with a charge of ATM theft. However, there are many other crimes that can also be charged depending on the circumstances such as:

Criminal Trespass
Burglary
Unlawful duplication of computer-related material
Unlawful possession of personal identification information
Scheme to defraud
Criminal possession of the stolen property
Criminal possession of a forged instrument
Coercion
Robbery

Under federal law, certain circumstances associated with ATM theft could result in a federal charge of bank robbery.^,The penalties for bank robbery, depending on the situation, are substantial (large fine and up to 20 years in prison) and can be brought in addition to state charges of ATM theft.

Also, federal law criminalizes identity theft and cyber crimes, which may be used in tandem with an ATM theft. The crimes associated with ATM theft are quite extensive and could also include federal charges. Many charges of ATM theft include computing tampering, identity theft, and/or possession of a skimmer device.

Here are some cases:

Since grand larceny in the third degree and aggravated grand larceny of an automated teller machine were recently added in the last 10 years, the courts have not addressed too many charges that specifically involve ATM thefts. However, the courts have had a lot to say when it comes to grand larceny.

In People v. Bonneau, a New York appeals court determined that evidence of previous bad actions can be used to show a defendant was acting dishonestly.

The defendant, Anthony Bonneau, contracted with the victim to be an auctioneer to sell some artwork. The proceeds for the auction were over 27,000 dollars. Bonneau held onto the funds after repeated requests from the victim to relinquish funds from the auction.

Bonneau continued to hold onto the funds and used them to pay off other obligations. He was charged and later convicted of grand larceny in the third degree.

He appealed the conviction stating there was insufficient evidence to support the charge of grand larceny in the third degree, and that the lower court should not have allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence of previous unrelated crimes during the trial.

The court was unmoved by these arguments. The court stated that it is sufficient to support grand larceny if an individual holds on to the proceeds belonging to another and uses those funds for their own benefit after requests for those funds to be relinquished.

Also, if a defendant states that their character is honest, the prosecution is allowed to refute this by using past actions that show when that individual was dishonest or untrustworthy. The court affirmed the conviction of Bonneau.

To read the court opinion in full, please click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/innyco20120405256

In People v. Morgan, a New York appeals court reversed the conviction of a defendant due to prosecutorial misconduct and insufficient evidence for a couple of the charges.

The defendant, Richard Morgan, had burgled various items that were stated to be over 3,000 dollars. Morgan contended that the purchase price of these items was insufficient, and the items true worth at the time they were stolen was not over 3,000 dollars. Also, the conviction should be reversed due to prosecutorial summations made at closing argument. The court agreed with Morgan.

The court stated that a person needs to claim more than the purchase price to introduce the value of an item. There must be a reasonable basis for their claim of how much it was at the time it was stolen. This includes condition, replacement value, etc. Purchase price alone is legally insufficient. Also, the prosecutor’s closing statements amounted to prosecutorial misconduct.

The court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial while dismissing two of the four charges against Morgan.

To read the court opinion in full, please click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/innyco20131108284

In People v. Garrett, a New York appeals court determined that larcenous intent can be inferred if false statements are made on government forms.

The defendant, Lawrence Garrett, worked for New York Transit authority but falsely claimed that it was a foreign entity on his tax forms. This allowed him to receive all the funds he had withheld from his wages. He was later charged and convicted of grand larceny. He appealed the conviction stating that the false claims on the tax return do not show a larcenous intent. The court disagreed.

The court stated that since Garrett falsely stated that his entity was a foreign entity and allowed him to receive funds, he would not have been entitled to, this properly inferred larcenous intent.

The court determined Garrett’s claims were without merit and dismissed the appeal, essentially affirming his conviction.

To read the court opinion in full, please click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/200747039ad3d4312216

Who investigates charges of ATM theft?

Depending on the current circumstances, and how an ATM theft occurred, there can be a number of different law enforcement agencies investigating a charge involving ATM theft. The New York Police Department will most likely be investigating the theft.

If it involves Identity Theft, there are specialized state units and several federal agencies, including the FTC and Secret Service, that will investigate.If it is considered a bank robbery, the FBI will have sole jurisdiction to investigate that charge. Also, New York and the federal government have task forces to deal with cybercrimes.

What are some defenses to a charge of ATM theft?

There are a few defenses that can be asserted to various charges associated with ATM theft. If you use coercive means, specifically stating you will accuse them of a crime, to obtain funds from an individual you reasonably believe are owed to you, it can be a valid defense.

For example, Jessica notices that 3,700 dollars are missing from her bank account. She calls the bank, and the bank asserts that an individual claiming to be her with proper photo identification withdrew the funds earlier that day.

She believes, in error, her identical twin sister has stolen the funds from her bank account since she was complaining that she did not have enough money to buy furniture for her new upscale apartment. She tells her sister that she will turn her in for the crime unless she gives the 3,700 dollars back to her.

Her sister gives Jessica the money, but it is later found out that someone other than Tanya forged Jessica’s identification and stole the money. Jessica has committed grand larceny and coercion against her sister; however, she may have a valid defense believing that her sister stole the money if it was a reasonable belief.

There are a variety of defenses that can be raised against a charge of ATM theft and associated crimes. Please call our law offices if you have any questions, and we can let you know of other possible defenses in your current situation.

What should I do if I have been charged with a crime of ATM theft?

Call us!

A charge of ATM theft and its associated crimes can result in severe legal penalties, but also a severe detriment to many aspects of your life. It affects you, your loved ones, your career, your activities, etc.,

Even charges that are later dismissed or you are acquitted can still leave deleterious effects. Some convictions can even lead to an automatic loss of jobs or professional licensure. This is why it is vital that you consult with a team that knows the law and what they are doing.

Our team knows about all of these potential and devastating impacts a charge of ATM theft can bring, and through their years of knowledge and experience will seek to provide the best help and defenses in your current situation. We will thoroughly evaluate your case to provide the best possible outcomes.

Please call us today for a free legal consultation!

Press releases

Multistate skimming fraud scheme stopped

Charge: Bank fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud, and aggravated identity theft

Allegation: A man used ATM skimmers to defraud customers in three states of almost 900,000 dollars.

In 2018, a Romanian man, Bogdan Viorel Rusu, pled guilty to his involvement in a multistate skimming scheme that resulted in over 868,000 dollars in losses.

According to the DOJ press release, Rusu and fellow co-conspirators used skimming devices that they installed near ATM machines along with tiny cameras. They recorded the customers’ information and keystrokes. After they had obtained enough data, they would create counterfeit ATM cards and steal money from the accounts and would move on before anyone would notice the fraudulent actions. After a joint investigation, Rusu was arrested and subsequently pled guilty to the charges.

To read the press release in full, please click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/romanian-national-pleads-guilty-multi-state-atm-card-skimming-scheme

Group charged with ATM skimming fraud

Charge: Credit card and ATM fraud

Allegation: Through a sophisticated scheme, a group targeted a credit card processor and in a coordinated attack stole over 9 million dollars.

In 2010, an Estonian man who was involved in the conspiracy was extradited to the United States for his role as one of the hackers for the group. According to the DOJ press release, Sergei Tsurikov was one of a group of hackers that worked in concert with “runners” that coordinated an attack on various ATM machines in several states.

Individuals would access ATM machines that had been hacked to allow counterfeit cards to work and allowed greater withdrawals than normal. This coordinated attack resulted in a loss of about 9 million dollars.

After Tsurikov’s involvement in this scheme was discovered, the US petitioned for his extradition. Estonia honored this petition and was extradited to the US to stand trial for his crimes associated with this conspiracy.

To read the press release in full, please click here. Or copy and paste the link below.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/estonian-hacker-extradited-united-states-face-computer-hacking-charges