Key Takeaways from the Supreme Court Ruling in Kousisis v. United States
When Fraud Is (and Isn't) A Federal Crime
Two recent U.S. Supreme Court cases—Ciminelli v. United States (2023) and Kousisis v. United States (2025)—have brought much-needed clarity to the scope of the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343. For lawyers, contractors, and anyone involved in federal funds or contracts, understanding the difference between these two cases is critical. Both involve deception—but only one resulted in a valid criminal conviction.
Korody Law is Jacksonville, Florida’s preeminent federal criminal defense law firm. Founding Attorney Patrick Korody is a former Special Assistant United States Attorney (SAUSA) and has been practicing federal criminal law for nearly 20 years and has received countless hours of training dedicated to defending federal criminal charges. Mr. Korody has defended healthcare fraud, wire fraud, tax fraud, conspiracy, drug trafficking, human trafficking, federal immigration crimes, and firearm offenses. Mr. Korody and his team are masters of federal criminal defense.
The Rejected "Right-to-Control" Theory in Ciminelli
In Ciminelli, prosecutors used what is known as the “right-to-control” theory. They argued that depriving a victim of accurate information needed to make economic decisions—without taking any money or property—was enough for wire fraud.
The Supreme Court unanimously disagreed. It held that the federal wire fraud statute only covers schemes to obtain traditional property interests like money or tangible goods. The ‘right to control’ how to spend or allocate resources is not itself a form of property.
Fraud that Counts: Kousisis and Government Contracts
United States v. Kousisis the defendant lied about hiring a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) as part of a state transportation contract—something required to qualify for the job. In truth, the DBE was a front.
Even though the government got the work it paid for, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction for wire fraud. Why? Because the contract (and money) was awarded under materially false pretenses. That was enough.
Ciminelli and Kousisis - Key Differences at a Glance
Ciminelli v. United States (2023)
- Prosecution's Legal Theory for Wire Fraud: Right to Control
- Property Taken: None (just economic information)
- Supreme Court Outcome: Conviction reversed
- Supreme Court: Wire fraud does not protect abstract decision rights
Kousisis v. United States (2025)
- Prosecution's Legal Theory for Wire Fraud: Material misrepresentation in contract
- Property Taken: Money through performance of contract
- Supreme Court Outcome: Conviction upheld
- Supreme Court: Material lies to obtain money, even if contract is performed=fraud
Why it matters
The Supreme Court has now drawn a firm line: If you deceive someone and that deceit is material to the decision to depart with actual money or property, you can be charged with wire fraud. But if all you do is influence their decision-making without acquiring anything tangible, that’s not a federal crime. This matters for federal contractors, compliance officers, and criminal defense lawyers alike.
If you have questions about how this may affect a pending case or compliance matter, our team is here to help.
Why Choose Us
- Feature/Benefit 1
- Feature/Benefit 2
- Feature/Benefit 3
- Feature/Benefit 4
