Sean James Hager v. United States

This Court’s precedents, from McNally v. United States to Skilling, have recognized a distinction between cognizable property interests and intangible rights in the context of mail and wire fraud prosecutions. As technology and society advance, lower courts must increasingly review wire and mail fraud convictions premised upon intangible rights, but lacking the “bribe or kickback” elements necessary to allege honest services fraud – a process which permits a right’s ascendance to the level of “property” by resorting to comparison with the factual circumstances discussed in Carpenter v. United States, 484 U.S. 19 (1987). The question presented is: In light of this Court’s decision in Skilling, does Carpenter’s intangible rights theory of fraud remain a legally viable theory of prosecution under the Wire and Mail Fraud statutes?