Identity Theft Defense in Jacksonville

What the State has to prove

Under section 817.568 the State must show that you willfully and fraudulently used, or possessed with the intent to use, the personal identification information of another person, and that you did so without that person's authorization. Personal identification information is defined broadly. It includes names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, account and card numbers, and other data that can identify a specific person. Two words in that definition carry most of the weight: willfully and fraudulently. The statute does not punish having someone's information. It punishes using it, or intending to use it, to defraud.

That is why so many identity theft defenses turn on consent and intent rather than on whether the data was used at all. A shared account, a family member's information used with permission, a business partner's credentials, an old authorization that was never revoked, all of these can look like identity theft in a charging document and turn out to be nothing of the kind once the relationship is explained. The question is rarely whether the information was used. It is whether the use was authorized and whether it was meant to defraud.

How the charge escalates

Identity theft does not sit at one level. The degree of the felony rises with the dollar amount obtained or the benefit sought, and it rises again with the number of separate victims whose information was used. Using the information of several people, or causing larger losses, pushes the charge up the ladder, and certain victims, such as minors and elderly or disabled persons, raise the level further. Cases involving many victims or large totals can reach the most serious felony tiers and carry mandatory minimum terms.

For the defense, the escalation structure means the same close work that fraud cases demand. How many victims the State can actually prove, how the loss figure was calculated, whether transactions were counted more than once, and whether some of the alleged uses were authorized all affect where the charge lands on the ladder. The level is not a fixed fact; it is built from the records, and the records can be tested.

Why early counsel matters

Identity theft investigations are document cases. They are assembled from bank records, card statements, account-access logs, and the accounts of the people whose information was used, usually before any arrest. What you say when an investigator calls, and what records you produce, can decide whether the case is charged and at what level. Getting a lawyer involved during that window, rather than after, is frequently the most valuable thing you can do.

Graham W. Syfert owned a technology company before practicing law and serves in the Georgia Bar's Technology Law Section, so account logs and digital records are familiar territory. He has defended the accused across Northeast Florida since 2007.