When Threats Become Felonies - What is Extortion ?
"I'm going to sue you!" !!!!!! Is this a protected statement of your intent or is it extortion? Does it matter if the threat is made by a huge corporation with unlimited funds against an individual who is a whistleblower? California has laws (Anti-Slapp statutes) which protect against litigation and lawsuits filed for no real purpose except to silence someone else. But day to day and in business situations parties threaten each other. When is the line crossed between hard negotiating and extortion?
At its core, California Penal Code § 518 PC defines extortion as obtaining property, money, or an official act from another through the wrongful use of force or fear. This "fear" is broad, encompassing threats to:
Injure the victim or a third party.
Accuse the victim of a crime.
Expose a secret or a damaging fact. Note: The secret or damaging fact can be a real fact. It can be true but the threat to expose this secret can still be extortion.
Inflict other forms of harm, like reputational or economic injury.
A conviction for extortion (PC § 518) or even attempted extortion (PC § 524) is a felony, typically carrying a sentence of 2–4 years in state prison and significant fines.
We searched the internet for examples of extortion to help illustrate when a threat is no longer "business" and crosses the line to be a crime.
Examples of Extortion Convictions
1. The Sextortion Scheme: People v. Umana (2006)
This case demonstrates that the internet is a modern tool for a classic crime.
The Scheme: Defendants Raul Umana and Jessica Langshaw worked together to target men with whom Langshaw had brief encounters. They sent menacing letters to the victims, falsely accusing them of sexual assault and demanding payments—from $500 to $5,000—to prevent public exposure or police reports.
We have many clients who are stuck in cases similar to this. Consensual sexual encounters lead to claims that the sex went too far or that certain aspects of the sexual encounter were beyond the consent. Married men interacting on dating sites are often targeted with threats of exposure. In the Umana case the victims did not pay money and instead sought law enforcement help. The court made it clear that even an attempt at extortion was a crime.
The Outcome: No victims actually paid, but the threats were clear. Both were convicted of multiple counts of attempted extortion (§ 524 PC). Umana received a 10-year prison sentence, and Langshaw received 6 years.
Key Takeaway: The court affirmed that the victim does not have to pay the money for the crime of attempted extortion to be complete. The mere act of making the threat to induce fear is enough.
2. The Subtle Business Threat: People v. Goldstein (1970)
Extortion doesn't always involve a direct, explicit threat of physical harm. Psychological coercion is often sufficient.
The Scheme: A former employee, Goldstein, approached a business partner of his ex-employer. He subtly implied he would disclose damaging, unconfirmed financial irregularities about the business unless he was paid a $10,000 "settlement." The fear of reputational and economic ruin prompted the victim to pay $5,000. It does not matter if the claims were true. If they were not true there is an obvious unfair damage to reputation. But ... if true the exposure or threat of exposure had nothing to do with promoting a public good. It was a pure money based demand and hence it was unprotected and fell into the realm of extortion.
The Outcome: Goldstein was convicted of extortion (§ 518 PC) and sentenced to 2 years.
Key Takeaway: The California Supreme Court confirmed that implicit threats qualify under the statute if they are reasonably interpreted by the victim as a threat designed to induce fear and compliance.
3. The Auto Shop Protection Racket: People v. Sanders (1993)
Extortion is frequently used in business settings to eliminate competition or run criminal rackets.
The Scheme: Sanders targeted a rival auto repair shop in San Diego. He threatened to sabotage the business by spreading false rumors of shoddy work and organizing boycotts unless the owner paid monthly $2,000 "protection" fees. The owner paid three installments before contacting law enforcement. Here the threat was to spread false rumors. The result was the same as the Goldstein case.
The Outcome: Sanders was convicted of two counts of extortion (§ 518 PC) and received 3 years in prison.
Key Takeaway: This case highlights that threats targeting economic harm (such as damaging business reputation or revenue) are clearly covered under the law.
4. Revenge Porn and Digital Blackmail: People v. Bollaert (2016)
This landmark case modernized extortion law to address digital exploitation.
The Scheme: Christopher Bollaert ran a website called "Is Anybody Down?" where he posted non-consensual intimate photos ("revenge porn") of over 1,000 individuals. He then demanded payments of $300–$1,000 from the victims to remove the images, preying on their fear of humiliation. Many victims paid.
The Outcome: Bollaert was convicted of 33 felony counts of extortion and illegal use of personal information. He received a hefty 18-year state prison sentence and was ordered to pay $1.5 million in restitution.
Key Takeaway: This ruling significantly expanded the application of extortion to digital platforms, emphasizing the severe penalties for exploiting victim privacy for financial gain.
5. Targeting the Vulnerable: People v. Sales (2004)
When a defendant targets a vulnerable person, such as an elderly individual, the penalties become even more severe due to sentencing enhancements.
The Scheme: The defendant, posing as a caregiver, targeted an elderly woman in Orange County. He threatened to report fabricated elder abuse by her family unless they paid him $15,000. The family paid $8,000 before realizing the deception and contacting police.
The Outcome: Sales was convicted of extortion (§ 518 PC) with an elder abuse enhancement (§ 525 PC). He received the upper term of 4 years in prison due to the victim's vulnerability.
Key Takeaway: Targeting vulnerable individuals, like seniors or dependents, triggers special enhancements that judges use to impose longer, more punitive sentences.
If you are the victim of extortion or if you are accused of extortion but you are innocent because you were pursuing legitimate goals, Criminal Defense Specialist Daniel Horowitz can help you. Working with remarkable attorneys such as Molly Northrup, Carmela Caramagno and Daniel Russo, our office can effecitvely negotiate and fight for the proper outcome. Call us at 925-283-1863 to set up an initial phone interview with one of our attorneys.
