The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Chandler, 98 F.3d 711 (2nd Cir. 1996):
18 U.S.C. 1344 (emphasis added). Subsections (1) and (2) are distinct, though often overlapping, offenses. The statute plainly provides that conviction for bank fraud requires proof of subsection (1) or subsection (2), but not both. See, e.g., United States v. Ragosta, 970 F.2d 1085 (2d Cir.1992) (affirming conviction based on subsection (1) only).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.