As more and more of our lives have moved online, more and more crime has moved online also. The State of Arizona has reacted by passing computer crime statutes. These laws pertain to internet crime as well as offline computer crime, such as altering or stealing computer files for financial gain.
Most computer crime involves the intent for financial gain, such as hacking credit card information to commit fraud or ransomware. However, many computer crimes in Arizona may not have a financial motive, including cyberstalking, online threats of violence, or child pornography.
Penalties often include prison time, with many computer offenses ranking as class 5 or class 3 felonies. Those facing computer crime charges need to take their situation seriously. Often, the penalties are just as high or higher than street crimes.
If you are wondering what constitutes a computer crime in Arizona and the potential penalties for conviction, this article tells you all you need to know.
The Arizona State Legislature criminalizes a wide variety of nefarious activity using the internet or computers. Some of the most common Arizona computer crimes include the following:
Arizona divides cybercrime into several broad categories, including the following: Criminal activities against humans, criminal activity against property (such as the transmission of a virus to damage a computer network), crimes against the government (such as stealing and/or disseminating data deemed classified by law).
As with other crimes, the prosecution must prove a defendant acted with criminal intent. It must have evidence that the defendant committed specific elements of the crime, including the engagement in intentional, knowing and/or criminally reckless behavior.
Arizona law enforcement receives over 60,000 cybercrime reports per year, with losses from cybercrime exceeding $20 million.
You might be surprised to lean that Arizona ranks seventh amongst U.S. states for cybercrime. California occupies the first position, which makes sense because it is a tech hub with a large population. However, Arizona has a mid-sized population and is not a tech center. So why does it rank so high?
One reason is Arizona’s prominence in the healthcare service provision industry, which creates and maintains medical records. Medical records receive far less cyber defense resources versus financial data and government documents, making them a tempting target for computer fraudsters.
Computer and internet crimes vary widely in severity, and so do the potential sentences. For example, the unauthorized possession of an access device counts as a class 6 felony, the least serious felony class under Arizona law. In addition to fines and other sanctions, convicts face between six months and two-years incarceration.
On the other hand, the unauthorized release of confidential or security information ranks as a more serious class 4 felony. An Arizona class 4 felony carries a prison term ranging from one to 3.75 years.
Computer tampering ranges from a class 5 to a class 3 felony, dependent on the scope of the illegal operation. Very serious computer tampering convictions can lead to a prison sentence between two and 8.75 years.
Arizona’s computer crime statutes are codified under section 13-2316. Conviction requires proof of the defendant’s mental state as intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committing the crime. There are no misdemeanor computer crimes in the State of Arizona. First degree computer fraud is considered a class 3 felony, while 2nd degree computer fraud is considered a class 5 felony.
Not everyone suspected of a computer- or internet crime is guilty of wrongdoing. Often, there is an innocent explanation, such as a hacker or other individual accessing your devices. In other cases, there may have been no intent to commit fraud or other criminal activity on the part of the accused.
Many defenses can be mounted against a charge of internet and computer crimes. Here are some of the most common:
These defenses often occur when a hacker uses the defendant’s device without his or her knowledge. The perpetrator can use the device physically or wirelessly. Hackers have grown highly sophisticated in in rerouting IP addresses to misdirect suspicion. An expert cybercriminal can often prevent the illegal activity from showing on his or her computer and make it appear it came from the innocent defendant’s device.
Another situation where framing and mistaken identity occurs when a co-worker has discovered the defendant’s password. In these cases, a dishonest employee may engage in computer fraud from a co-worker’s terminal and let that person take the blame. For example, a bank teller could use a co-worker’s password to steal money from that person’s drawer and make it appear the innocent teller stole the money.
Arizona law requires the prosecution to prove that the defendant had the intent to commit an offense specifically designated by the statute. For example, the state must show that a hacker intended commit fraud, delete programs, steal and share security secrets, etc. because these acts are expressly prohibited by law.
However, a student altering a school website as a prank clearly was not engaged in an act of theft, fraud, or other act deemed a crime under the statute. Therefore, the student is not guilty of internet and computer crime, though he or she may be in trouble with the school.
Regardless of the type of offense, defense attorneys always consider whether law enforcement violated the constitution in the course of its investigation. Often, police violate Miranda rights to gain admissions from the defendant they can use in court. This may particularly be the case if the evidence is weak and law enforcement needs an admission from the suspect to shore up its case.
To be admissible under Arizona law, incriminating statements must be voluntary. If the statement was coerced, through intimidation, trickery or other underhanded method, it is not voluntary and therefore not admissible. In addition, if law enforcement failed to properly advise the suspect of his or her Miranda rights, any inculpatory statements are also inadmissible.
In some cases, the suspect requests a lawyer and law enforcement refuses this request and continues questioning. This violates the suspect’s right to counsel, which is another common defense.
Before law enforcement officers can search electronic devices, they must have a valid search warrant. If no warrant has been issued, it is unlikely that the police can successfully claim searching through computer files was incidental to arrest or another situation made a warrantless search permissible. Evidence from a warrantless search of an electronic device has a good chance of being suppressed.
If law enforcement obtained a warrant, it must be valid. For example, a search warrant for a home does not necessarily extend to searching the electronic content of a computer. In addition, a warrant obtained under false evidence is also invalid.
Many computer and internet crime cases rely heavily on forensic evidence, such as computer analysis, IP tracing, or forensic accounting. If this work was shoddy, it may create reasonable doubt.
The police must do a careful job of finding and documenting evidence. If police reports are full or errors, misleading statements, and other indicators or poor- or unethical police work, reasonable doubt can often be established.
Internet and computer crimes are a fact of the modern world. Arizona law prohibits specific actions using a computer or electronic device, such as fraud, theft of private data, and cyber stalking. To win a conviction, the prosecution must show convincing evidence that the defendant engaged in one or more of the specifically prohibited actions.
If you are facing an internet or computer crime charge or investigation, hire a skilled computer crimes defense attorney in Arizona as soon as possible. A lawyer can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the state’s case, determine what defenses apply, and obtain a dismissal of charges, acquittal, or the best outcome in a plea bargain.