Skip navigation

U.S. v. Peppe, No. 95-2121 (1st Cir.) (80 F.3d 19) (March 29, 1996) (Judge Norman H. Stahl)

The Court found that the defendant's offense conduct involved the extortionate extension of credit; and thus the condition of prescreening new credit charges and credit lines "is a reasonable information-gathering device for the probation office to monitor Peppe's use of money. . . . Therefore, the condition meets the requirements ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login