Money Laundering · Texas and Federal Charges

How Does Texas Penal Code Section 34.02 Differ?

How Texas money-laundering charges differ from federal charges, and which transaction, knowledge, and value records matter.

By Heath Hyde · East Texas and statewide

Mr. Heath Enix ‘Heath’ Hyde
Eligible to Practice in Texas
Attorney at Law
Bar Card Number: 00796807
TX License Date: 11/01/1996

Primary Practice Location: Sulphur Springs, TX and Dallas, TX
214 Connally St Ste A
Sulphur Spgs, TX 75482-2612

Request a consultationCall 903-439-0000

“It was less than $10,000.” That may matter to a federal Section 1957 allegation. It does not dispose of a Texas money-laundering charge. Texas Penal Code Section 34.02 has different language, different value ranges, and several ways an offense can be committed. Read the actual count before trying to compare it with federal law. Keep the identified property’s origin, value, and the person’s knowledge in view when comparing bank entries, invoices, payment instructions, and delivery records.

First, identify the conduct alleged

The word “knowingly” comes before the alternatives in Section 34.02(a). Here is what to look for in the charge:

• Acquiring or maintaining an interest in proceeds, or concealing, possessing, transferring, or transporting them.
• Conducting, supervising, or facilitating a transaction involving proceeds.
• Investing, spending, or receiving proceeds or funds believed to be proceeds, or offering to do so.
• Financing or investing, or intending to finance or invest, funds believed to be intended to further criminal activity.

For those last two alternatives, ask what the person believed about the funds, including any intended use to finance further criminal activity.

Section 34.01 supplies the definitions. Among other things, funds include electronic funds and digital currency. Criminal activity includes Texas or federal felonies and offenses punishable by more than a year of confinement under another state’s law. Counsel should read the definition of proceeds too, rather than assuming it means whatever a bank summary calls income.

Section 34.02(a-1) says knowledge of the specific nature of the criminal activity producing the proceeds is not required. That does not erase “knowingly” from subsection (a). What the person knew remains something to investigate.

Next, check the amount and the date

Suppose the allegation concerns $6,000. Under the listed Texas ranges, that falls within the state jail felony band. The current Section 34.02(e) ranges are:

• $2,500 to less than $30,000: state jail felony.
• $30,000 to less than $150,000: third-degree felony.
• $150,000 to less than $300,000: second-degree felony.
• $300,000 or more: first-degree felony.

Check the offense-date statute, amendments, territorial rules, and venue. For related theft, forgery, or identity counts, examine intent, ownership, and value separately.

Subsection (f) allows aggregation of proceeds across sources for one scheme or continuing course of conduct. Avoid double counting the same funds.

The federal comparison depends on the count

Section 1956(a)(1) is not one undifferentiated rule. Promotion under (A)(i) requires intent to promote specified unlawful activity. Concealment under (B)(i) requires knowledge that the transaction was designed, at least partly, to disguise the proceeds’ nature, location, source, ownership, or control. There must also be knowledge that the property represented proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, along with the other elements.

Section 1957 does not require that same concealment purpose. It concerns knowingly engaging, or attempting to engage, in a qualifying monetary transaction involving criminally derived property worth more than $10,000 from specified unlawful activity. Its monetary-transaction definition generally involves a financial institution and an interstate or foreign commerce connection. Knowledge of which specified unlawful activity produced the property is not required.

That explains why the $6,000 example raises different questions under Texas law and Section 1957. It also explains why a $12,000 transfer is not automatically a federal offense. More than an amount needs to be proved. Ask about the federal matter separately even after a Texas disposition; one does not automatically end the other.

This article provides general information, not legal advice. The law and its application depend on the facts and the law in effect on the relevant date. Consult a lawyer about a specific matter.

Money Laundering Defense · Texas and Federal Financial Crimes Defense