UNITED STATES v. GIRARD Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A DEA agent and a former agent were convicted for selling confidential agency records. The court held that intangible information from a government computer system constitutes a “thing of value” under the federal theft statute, 18 U.S.C. § 641.
Legal Significance: This case established that intangible property, specifically confidential government information, is a “thing of value” subject to theft and conversion under 18 U.S.C. § 641. This expanded the statute’s application beyond tangible goods to include valuable data and information.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Appellant Girard, a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent, conspired with appellant Lambert, a current DEA agent, to sell confidential information from the DEA’s computerized records. Girard offered to sell DEA reports to an individual named Bond, who was secretly a government informant. The DEA provided Bond with four names to request from Girard. To identify the inside source, the DEA monitored its computer system for access to these specific names. The monitoring revealed that Lambert accessed the records using a DEA computer terminal and provided the information to Girard. Girard and Lambert were subsequently charged with, and convicted of, conspiracy and the unauthorized sale of government property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. On appeal, the appellants argued that § 641 applies only to tangible property or documents, not to the sale of intangible information.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does confidential, intangible information stored in a government computer system constitute a “record… or thing of value” that can be unlawfully sold or converted under 18 U.S.C. § 641?
Yes. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that confidential information from the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitati
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does confidential, intangible information stored in a government computer system constitute a “record… or thing of value” that can be unlawfully sold or converted under 18 U.S.C. § 641?
Conclusion
This decision solidified the principle that federal theft statutes apply to intangible Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad min
Legal Rule
The phrase "thing of value" in 18 U.S.C. § 641 is broadly Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehender
Legal Analysis
The Second Circuit rejected the appellants' narrow interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor si
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Holding: The unauthorized sale of intangible confidential government information from a