Is Stalking in Collusion to Commit Fraud a Federal Crime?

1. What federal law says about stalking and cyberstalking

Federal law criminalizes stalking and cyberstalking when the conduct involves interstate travel or the use of interstate communications (for example the mail, internet, or telephones), with 18 U.S.C. §2261A and related provisions expressly extending traditional stalking definitions to electronic surveillance and interactive computer services ^{[1] [2] [4]}. Multiple practitioner guides and legal summaries stress that the interstate-commerce hook—crossing state lines or using an interstate electronic channel—is the principal basis for elevating stalking from a state to a federal offense ^{[5] [6]}.

2. How fraud becomes federal and where “collusion” fits

Federal statutes frequently cover fraud schemes that use the mails, wires, or interstate commerce—classic examples being mail and wire fraud—while conspiracy or collusion to commit fraud is actionable federally when those jurisdictional predicates exist or when the scheme affects federal interests ^{[3] [7]}. Criminal defense and prosecutor resources note that fraud-related statutes carry a wide range of penalties and are prosecuted in federal court when the offense involves interstate communications or other federalized channels ^{[3] [7]}.

3. Putting stalking and fraud together: prosecution strategies, not a new statute

The available reporting indicates prosecutors typically charge stalking under §2261A and fraud (or conspiracy to commit fraud) under mail/wire fraud or related statutes as separate counts when the facts support both elements, rather than relying on a single statute called “stalking in collusion to commit fraud” ^{[2] [3]}. In practice, that means conduct that uses electronic tools to harass a victim while simultaneously facilitating a fraud scheme can generate parallel federal counts—cyberstalking counts for the harassment and mail/wire-fraud or conspiracy counts for the fraudulent scheme—provided the interstate or federal nexus is proven ^{[4] [3]}.

4. Evidentiary and mens rea hurdles the defense will stress

Defenses discussed in the sources underscore that prosecutors must prove intent and the interstate or federal channel element for federal stalking, and intent to defraud for fraud charges; without those elements, federal courts lack jurisdiction and convictions cannot stand, which is why many cases remain state prosecutions unless the interstate predicates are clear ^{[5] [8] [4]}. Legal commentators also note the constitutional and First Amendment scrutiny that can arise in cyberstalking prosecutions—especially where speech is involved—creating additional limits on overbroad federal application ^[5].

5. Bottom line and limits of available reporting

There is no single federal statute in the reviewed reporting called “stalking in collusion to commit fraud,” but federal law separately criminalizes stalking/cyberstalking (with an interstate communications nexus) and a wide range of frauds and conspiracies; where facts boot both jurisdictional hooks, federal prosecutors can and do bring both stalking and fraud (or conspiracy) charges together ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The sources do not provide a definitive example or case law labeled exactly as “stalking in collusion to commit fraud,” so it cannot be affirmed from these materials whether courts have treated the combination as a distinct single offense rather than parallel charges ^{[2] [3]}.