Cyber Crime

Many Alabama cyber crime cases that begin as state investigations are referred to or prosecuted concurrently by federal authorities under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030. The CFAA covers unauthorized access to "protected computers" — broadly defined to include virtually any computer connected to the internet or involved in interstate commerce.

Federal penalties range from 1 year to 20 years depending on the offense:

• Unauthorized access to obtain information: up to 1 to 5 years
• Computer fraud (accessing with intent to defraud): up to 5 to 10 years
• Intentional damage to protected computers: up to 1 to 10 years
• Reckless damage: up to 1 to 5 years
• Extortion involving computers: up to 5 years

Second or subsequent offenses double the maximum sentence. Federal cyber crime cases are investigated by the FBI's Cyber Division, the Secret Service's Electronic Crimes Task Force, and the Department of Homeland Security agencies with deep forensic resources and extended investigative timelines.

For cases that escalate into full federal prosecution, the considerations around mandatory sentencing under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, cooperation, and plea negotiation are addressed in our federal crimes defense page.

Beyond the Digital Crime Act, Alabama prosecutes related digital offenses under separate identity theft and fraud statutes. Alabama's Consumer Identity Protection Act covers theft and fraudulent use of personal identifying information. Online fraud involving wire transfers, bank accounts, or financial institutions commonly triggers parallel federal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud, up to 20 years per count) or 18 U.S.C. § 1344 (bank fraud, up to 30 years).

The compounding of counts is one of the most consequential features of cyber crime prosecution at the federal level. A fraud scheme involving 50 electronic transactions is potentially charged as 50 separate counts of wire fraud — each carrying up to 20 years. Federal prosecutors routinely charge counts this way to generate plea leverage, and the guidelines sentencing calculation reflects the total number of counts and loss amount.

Digital evidence cases require the same rigorous Fourth Amendment analysis as any other criminal case — and often more. Investigators must obtain proper legal authority to seize computers, search stored data, intercept communications, and compel disclosure of electronic records from service providers. Deficiencies in search warrants, overbroad seizure of devices, and unlawful compelled disclosure of stored communications are all viable suppression issues in cyber crime cases.

Beyond the constitutional issues, we examine:

Authorization and access scope. Computer tampering and CFAA charges require proof that the defendant acted without authorization or in excess of authorization. Where a defendant had any legitimate access to a system, the boundary of that authorization is a contested factual issue — and recent Supreme Court guidance in Van Buren v. United States (2021) has narrowed what constitutes "exceeding authorized access" under federal law.

Attribution. Digital evidence — IP addresses, device identifiers, account activity logs — does not automatically identify the person who performed an act. Shared networks, spoofed accounts, malware operating on a victim's own machine, and compromised credentials are all documented defense considerations in cyber cases. The government must prove the defendant personally performed the charged conduct, not merely that a device or account associated with the defendant was involved.

Challenging forensic methodology. Digital forensic analysis is not infallible. Chain of custody for electronic evidence, the reliability of forensic tools, and the integrity of data extraction are all subject to expert challenge.