Skip navigation

Search

10 results
Article • December 26, 2016 • from P&J December, 2016
Shaw v. U.S., No. 15-5991 (U.S. Supreme Court) (580 U.S. ___; 137 S.Ct. 462) (December 12, 2016) (Justice Breyer) by Here a unanimous Court rejected the petitioner’s arguments that 18 U.S.C. § 1344, which covers schemes to deprive a bank of money in a customer’s deposit account, did not apply …
Article • December 1, 2012
U.S. v. Zangari, No. 10-4546-cr (2nd Cir.) (677 F.3d 86) (April 18, 2012) (Judge Jose A. Cabranes) by In a prosecution of a securities broker for conspiracy to violate the Travel Act, which resulted in a conviction and sentence that included a restitution order under the Mandatory Victim’s Restitution Act …
Article • March 1, 2002 • from P&J March, 2002
U.S. v. Royston, No. 5:01CR30042 (W.D.Va.) (184 F.Supp.2d 517) (January 30, 2002) (Judge James C. Turk) by According to statistics released on April 2, 2002 by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the growth rate of America’s prison population has slowed to 4.4% - the lowest annual growth rate since 1979. …
Article • November 1, 2001 • from P&J November, 2001
U.S. v. Ali, No. 00-10216 (9th Cir.) (266 F.3d 1242) (October 2, 2001) (Judge A. Wallace Tashima) by Here, giving a stern warning to prosecutors, the Court held that, while the evidence required to prove the federally-insured status of a a bank is minimal, the mere submission of a certificate …
Article • June 23, 2001
Bell v. U.S., No. 82-5119 (U.S. Supreme Court) (462 U.S. 356; 103 S.Ct. 2398) (June 13, 1983) (Justice Powell) by Here the Court held held that the federal bank larceny statute (18 USC § 2113(b)) was not limited to the common law crime of larceny, and that the statutory language …
Article • July 1, 2000 • from P&J July, 2000
U.S. v. Kenrick, No. 98-1282 (1st Cir.) (221 F.3d 19) (August 2, 2000) (Judge Kermit A. Lipez) by Here the en banc Court held that "intent to harm" is not an element of bank fraud under 18 USC § 1344, concluding that there was no "consensus" among the Circuits on …
Article • July 1, 2000 • from P&J July, 2000
U.S. v. Kenrick, No. 98-1282 (1st Cir.) (221 F.3d 19) (August 2, 2000) (Judge Kermit A. Lipez) by Following a detailed comparision of this en banc decision and the panel's earlier decision which it reversed, we feel that there are significant questions about the validity of the Court's holding that …
Article • July 1, 2000 • from P&J July, 2000
U.S. v. Akers, No. 99-1089 (10th Cir.) (215 F.3d 1089) (June 12, 2000) (Judge Arthur L. Alarcon) by This is another bank fraud case that reviews some of the burdens of proof required for a bank fraud conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1344. In this case, the defendant was convicted …
Article • July 1, 2000 • from P&J July, 2000
U.S. v. Agne, No. 98-1974 (1st Cir.) (214 F.3d 47) (May 31, 2000) (Judge Frank M. Coffin) by In this case, the First Circuit held that the federal statutory provision that doubles the limitations period for a wire fraud prosecution if the offense "affects a financial institution" (18 U.S.C. § …
Article • January 1, 2000 • from P&J August, 2000
U.S. v. Kenrick, No. 98-1282 (1st Cir.) ( Slip ) (February 22, 2000) (Judge Kermit A. Lipez) by United States v. Kenrick, No. 98-1283 (1st Cir. 8/2/00) (En Banc) (Judge Lipez) United States v. Kenrick, No. 98-1282 (1st Cir. 2/22/00) (Unpublished) (Judge Lipez) Last week we reviewed the First Circuit’s …