Computer fraud charges under § 18.2-152.3 can result in felony convictions, prison sentences, and permanent damage to your career and reputation. D.J. Rivera — a Computer Engineer with a D.Eng. in Cybersecurity Analytics and six elite cybersecurity certifications — provides the technical and legal expertise your defense demands.
Virginia Code § 18.2-152.3 — Computer Fraud
It shall be unlawful for any person to use a computer or computer network, without authority and with the intent to obtain property or services by false pretenses, embezzle or commit larceny, or convert the property of another, to: (i) obtain property or services of another; (ii) embezzle or commit larceny; or (iii) convert the property of another.
Virginia's computer fraud statute is broad and encompasses a wide range of conduct involving computers and networks. At its core, the offense requires three elements: (1) use of a computer or computer network; (2) without authority or in excess of authority; and (3) with the intent to obtain property, services, or money through fraud, embezzlement, larceny, or conversion.
The statute is frequently charged in cases involving unauthorized access to financial systems, manipulation of computer records for financial gain, online fraud schemes, and misuse of employer computer systems. It is also commonly charged alongside federal offenses such as wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030).
| Offense Level | Trigger | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Computer Fraud (High Value) | Property/services ≥ $1,000 | Class 5 Felony | 1–10 years / $2,500 fine |
| Computer Fraud (Lower Value) | Property/services < $1,000 | Class 6 Felony | 1–5 years / $2,500 fine |
| Federal Wire Fraud (if charged) | Electronic communication used | Federal Felony | Up to 20 years federal prison |
| Federal CFAA (if charged) | Protected computer involved | Federal Felony | Up to 20 years federal prison |
Important: Computer fraud charges frequently trigger parallel federal investigations. If you are contacted by the FBI, Secret Service, or any federal agency about computer fraud, do not speak to investigators without an attorney present. Contact D.J. Rivera immediately.
Accessing employer computer systems beyond the scope of employment to obtain financial data, customer lists, or proprietary information. These cases frequently involve disputes about the scope of authorization and whether the employee's access was truly "without authority."
Using computers or the internet to conduct phishing attacks, advance fee fraud, auction fraud, or other schemes to obtain money or property by false pretenses. These cases often involve both state and federal charges.
Unauthorized access to banking, payroll, or accounting systems to redirect funds, alter records, or obtain financial information. These cases typically involve significant monetary amounts and carry the most serious penalties.
Using another person's credentials to access computer systems and obtain property or services. These cases frequently overlap with identity theft charges under both Virginia and federal law.
Accessing a competitor's computer systems to obtain trade secrets, customer data, or proprietary information. These cases can also involve federal trade secret charges under the Defend Trade Secrets Act.
Former employees who access former employer systems after termination to obtain data or cause damage. The "without authority" element is often clear in these cases, making the intent element the primary defense focus.
The most powerful defense in computer fraud cases is challenging whether the defendant's access was truly "without authority." Authorization in computer systems is rarely binary — it exists on a spectrum. An employee who has broad system access may have implicitly authorized access to areas beyond their specific job function. A contractor who is given credentials may have authorization that extends beyond the narrow task they were hired to perform. After the Supreme Court's decision in Van Buren v. United States (2021), the scope of "exceeding authorized access" under federal law was significantly narrowed, and Virginia courts have begun applying similar reasoning to state computer fraud charges.
Computer fraud requires proof of specific intent — the intent to obtain property by false pretenses, embezzle, commit larceny, or convert property. Accessing a computer system out of curiosity, to expose a security vulnerability, or to recover one's own property does not constitute computer fraud. D.J. Rivera develops intent defenses by scrutinizing the defendant's purpose and the context of the access, and presenting evidence that the defendant lacked the required fraudulent intent.
The Fourth Amendment applies to digital searches and seizures. Law enforcement must obtain a warrant supported by probable cause before seizing computers, accessing email accounts, or obtaining data from third-party service providers. Warrants must be sufficiently specific — general warrants authorizing seizure of all digital devices are frequently overbroad. D.J. Rivera scrutinizes every search warrant in computer fraud cases and files suppression motions where the warrant was deficient or improperly executed.
D.J. Rivera's D.Eng. in Cybersecurity Analytics and GCFE (GIAC Certified Forensic Examiner) certification give him the technical expertise to challenge the government's digital forensic evidence at the same level as the investigators who collected it. He reviews forensic reports for methodological errors, challenges the integrity of forensic images through hash value analysis, scrutinizes chain of custody documentation, and identifies alternative explanations for the digital evidence that are consistent with innocence.
In many computer fraud cases, the government's primary evidence linking the defendant to the offense is an IP address. D.J. Rivera challenges IP address attribution by demonstrating that an IP address identifies a network connection — not a specific person. Dynamic IP assignment, shared networks (home WiFi, public hotspots), VPN usage, and the possibility of unauthorized use of the defendant's network can all undermine the government's attribution evidence.
Most criminal defense attorneys approach computer fraud cases the same way they approach any other fraud case — by challenging the prosecution's evidence through cross-examination and legal argument. D.J. Rivera does all of that, and more. His B.S. in Computer Engineering, M.S. in Information Technology (Virginia Tech), and D.Eng. in Cybersecurity Analytics (George Washington University) give him the technical foundation to understand and challenge the government's digital evidence at the deepest level.
His six elite cybersecurity certifications — CISSP, CEH, GCFE, GPEN, GCIH, and GSLC — are the same credentials held by the FBI cyber investigators and federal forensic examiners building the case against you. He has defended critical computer networks for the United States Marine Corps under US Cyber Command. He is the only attorney in the United States to have won a federal jury trial against the FBI and DOJ in a computer-related federal criminal case.
Time is critical. Do not speak to investigators without an attorney. D.J. Rivera is available 24/7 for a free, confidential consultation.
Get Your Free Consultation Now