Theft from Interstate Shipment – 18 U.S.C. § 659 Sentencing Guidelines

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group, a second-generation firm managed by Todd Spodek with over 40 years of combined experience. Section 659 makes stealing from interstate or foreign shipments a federal crime. Cargo theft, porch piracy of Amazon packages, truck hijackings, warehouse theft of goods in transit—all fall under this statute when shipments crossed or will cross state lines. Maximum sentence: 10 years imprisonment. Congress federalized cargo theft because state law enforcement struggled with jurisdiction when stolen goods moved through multiple states and thieves operated across borders.

The statute covers theft from various forms of shipment: motor vehicles, railway cars, aircraft, vessels, pipelines. It extends to goods being held for shipment or storage as part of interstate movement. That means warehouse theft, distribution center piracy, and stealing from loading docks all qualify as Section 659 violations when goods were in transit between states.

The Interstate Commerce Element

Prosecutors must prove goods were moving or about to move in interstate commerce. A package traveling from California to New York clearly satisfies this. But what about goods sitting in a New Jersey warehouse before local delivery within the state? If those goods previously traveled from out of state to reach the warehouse, they’re still in interstate commerce for Section 659 purposes.

Courts interpret interstate commerce broadly. Goods retain their interstate character until they reach final destination and come to rest. A shipment from Texas to Pennsylvania that stops at a Maryland distribution center remains in interstate commerce when stolen from that center. The temporary stopover doesn’t terminate interstate movement for jurisdictional purposes.

This expansive interpretation means most commercial cargo theft qualifies as federal crime. Modern supply chains involve goods moving through multiple states before reaching consumers. Even goods manufactured and sold within the same state often travel through out-of-state distribution centers or use transportation companies operating interstate systems.

Porch Pirates and Federal Jurisdiction

Package theft from residential porches exploded with e-commerce growth. Someone orders goods from Amazon, UPS delivers to their front door, thieves steal packages before owners retrieve them. Is this federal crime under Section 659?

Technically yes if packages traveled interstate. An iPhone shipped from California to a New York address crossed state lines, making theft from the porch a Section 659 violation. But federal prosecutors rarely charge porch pirates—resources are limited, amounts are usually small, and state larceny laws adequately address the conduct.

Federal prosecution happens when porch piracy becomes organized criminal enterprise. Defendants who steal hundreds of packages, operate theft rings, or fence stolen goods on large scales attract FBI and Postal Inspector attention. Single-package theft stays in state court; systematic operations end up federal.

Cargo Theft Sentencing

Guidelines Section 2B1.1 governs, calculating offense levels from stolen goods’ value. Theft under $6,500 yields level 6 (probation to 6 months). As values increase, levels climb: $40,000 to $95,000 reaches level 10; $250,000 to $550,000 hits level 14; over $3.5 million lands at level 20.

Cargo theft often involves higher values than typical theft. A single truck contains hundreds of thousands worth of electronics, pharmaceuticals, or consumer goods. Thieves who hijack trucks or burglarize warehouses steal massive amounts in single incidents, driving offense levels to 14-18 range even for first offenders.

Organized theft rings that steal regularly face even higher levels through sophisticated-means enhancement and relevant conduct adding together multiple thefts. Five cargo thefts over six months, each netting $100,000, calculate as $500,000 total loss—offense level 16 before enhancements. Add 2 levels for sophisticated means (coordinated theft ring, fraudulent shipping documents, insider information) and you’re at level 18: 27-33 months for first offender.

The Organized Crime Connection

Cargo theft isn’t random street crime. Organized networks target high-value shipments, use inside information from transportation employees, fence stolen goods through established distribution channels, and operate across multiple states. These aren’t desperate individuals stealing to survive—they’re criminal enterprises generating millions annually.

Federal prosecution focuses on these organizations rather than opportunistic individuals. FBI investigates cargo theft rings the way it targets drug trafficking organizations: wiretaps, surveillance, confidential informants, undercover operations. Prosecutions seek to dismantle entire networks, not just charge individual thefts.

This creates disparity. The warehouse worker who steals one shipment faces 18-24 months. The organized ring member who stole fifty shipments faces 5-7 years. But the ring member who cooperates, provides information about the organization, and testifies against leaders? They might serve less time than the lone warehouse thief who had no information to trade.

Cooperation value drives sentencing outcomes in organized cargo theft cases. Defendants with knowledge about larger operations receive substantial assistance departures reducing sentences below guidelines. Defendants without cooperation value serve guideline sentences even when their actual culpability is comparable.

Warehouse Burglary vs. Cargo Theft

State burglary laws criminalize breaking into warehouses and stealing goods. Section 659 criminalizes the same conduct when goods are in interstate commerce. Prosecutors charge both federal and state offenses, usually proceeding federally because penalties are higher and resources greater.

Defense occasionally challenges whether federal prosecution is necessary. If goods hadn’t yet entered interstate commerce or had completed their interstate journey, state burglary charges might be the proper vehicle. But courts defer to prosecutorial discretion about which sovereign prosecutes, and federal prosecutors rarely abandon cargo theft cases to state authorities.

The Buyer Defense

Section 659 criminalizes not just stealing but also receiving, concealing, buying, selling, or facilitating transportation of stolen goods knowing they were stolen from interstate shipment. That means fence operations, retailers selling stolen cargo, and buyers who purchase stolen goods knowing their origin all face prosecution.

The buyer defense: claiming lack of knowledge that goods were stolen. Someone who purchased electronics from an online marketplace at

suspiciously low prices might genuinely not have known they were buying stolen cargo. But prosecutors prove knowledge through circumstantial evidence: prices far below retail suggesting stolen goods, purchases from non-retail sources, furtive transaction circumstances, lack of legitimate receipts or documentation.

If you bought iPhone cases for $2 each when retail price is $20, knew the seller operated from a van rather than a store, paid cash without receipts, and purchased hundreds at a time—claiming you didn’t know they were stolen strains credibility. Willful blindness satisfies knowledge requirements; defendants who deliberately avoided learning goods’ source face liability as if they had actual knowledge.

When Federal Prosecution Seems Disproportionate

A UPS driver steals one package worth $800 from their delivery truck. Federal prosecution under Section 659? Probably not—amount is below felony threshold, defendant has no criminal history, employer resolved the matter through termination and restitution. But if prosecutors decide to charge federally, they legally can.

The statute’s broad reach gives prosecutors enormous discretion. They can federalize most theft involving commercial goods since virtually all commercial products move interstate at some point. That discretion creates potential for selective prosecution and disproportionate charging.

Defense challenges selective prosecution when evidence suggests defendants were targeted for improper reasons—race, whistleblowing, retaliation for complaints against employers. But these challenges rarely succeed. Courts presume prosecutorial good faith and require defendants prove discriminatory intent and effect, showing similarly situated defendants of different races weren’t prosecuted. That burden is nearly impossible to meet.

Restitution to Corporate Victims

When cargo theft victims are corporations—Amazon, FedEx, retail chains—restitution goes to entities with massive resources. Courts order defendants pay full value of stolen goods to companies that have already absorbed losses through insurance and business reserves. The companies suffered no actual hardship; they incorporated theft losses into pricing models and passed costs to consumers.

Meanwhile defendants face financial ruin from restitution orders they’ll never satisfy. Someone who stole $50,000 in cargo serves 18 months in prison then owes $50,000 in restitution. They’ll never pay it. Wage garnishment takes 15-25% of minimum-wage jobs, yielding maybe $3,000 annually. At that rate, restitution takes 15-20 years to satisfy—assuming defendants maintain employment for decades after release, which convicted felons rarely do.

The restitution system pretends to make victims whole but actually imposes symbolic lifetime financial penalties on defendants while enriching already-profitable corporations with double recovery—insurance payment plus restitution. It would be more honest to call restitution what it is: a fine payable to corporate victims who don’t need it.

If you’re facing Section 659 charges, contact Spodek Law Group immediately. Cargo theft prosecutions often involve complex jurisdictional questions about whether goods were actually in interstate commerce, loss calculations determining offense levels, and cooperation opportunities that might significantly reduce sentences if pursued early. We represent defendants charged with everything from single-package theft to organized cargo theft operations. Early representation allows us to potentially negotiate resolutions before formal charges, challenge federal jurisdiction when state prosecution is more appropriate, and present mitigation about our clients’ circumstances that prosecutors and courts need to understand before making charging and sentencing decisions. We’re available 24/7.