Stephayne McClure-Potts, Social Security Fraud, Pennsylvania 2016

Related Federal Cases

Bucks Woman Charged with Social Security Fraud Scam · Pennsylvania
Belle Vernon Woman Swindles Social Security Out of $116K · Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh Exec Accused of Medicaid Heist, Social Security Scam · Pennsylvania
Vet Milked the Military: $1M Fraud · Pennsylvania
Erie CFO Accused of Bank Fraud, Tax Evasion · Pennsylvania

Table of Contents

Pennsylvania Woman Sentenced for Social Security Fraud

HARRISBURG – Stephayne McClure-Potts, a 51-year-old Harrisburg resident, pleaded guilty to social security fraud and harboring an illegal alien in a federal court.

According to United States Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, McClure-Potts provided false information to the Commissioner of Social Security on ten separate occasions with the intent to obtain a social security card with a fictitious identity for another person. This is a serious breach of public trust and highlights the importance of accountability in our society.

McClure-Potts also harbored an illegal alien from March 2013 through August 2015. This action not only defied the law but also put the community at risk. The consequences of such actions are severe and far-reaching.

Michael McClure-Potts, McClure-Potts’ spouse, was also charged in October 2016, with harboring an illegal alien from March 2013 through August 2015. His trial is scheduled to begin on February 21, 2017.

This case was investigated by the Department of State Diplomatic Security Service, the Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General, and the City of Harrisburg Bureau of Police. Assistant United States Attorney Daryl F. Bloom is prosecuting the case.

A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by Judge Sylvia H. Rambo after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. The maximum penalties under federal law for these offenses is 10 years’ imprisonment, a term of supervised release of three years, and a $500,000 fine.

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines require the Judge to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances, and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public, and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational, and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.

This case serves as a reminder that crimes of this nature will not be tolerated and those responsible will be held accountable. The community demands justice and we will continue to work tirelessly to ensure that those who break the law face the consequences.