In a case arising out of false information submitted by the defendant in connection with his work as a bail bondsman, and involving charges of, among other things, unlawful access of a government computer and obtaining property by false pretenses, the defendant did not make out a prima facie case for selective prosecution. To demonstrate selective prosecution, a defendant must first make a prima facie showing that he has been singled out for prosecution while others similarly situated and committing the same acts have not; and second, after doing so, he must demonstrate that the discriminatory selection for prosecution was invidious and done in bad faith in that it rests upon such impermissible considerations as race, religion, or the desire to prevent his exercise of constitutional rights. Here, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that certain testimony at trial established “the total lack of prosecutions of bail bondsmen . . . for intentionally filing false reports.”