Skip navigation

Search

7 results
Article • March 1, 2000 • from P&J March, 2000
U.S. v. Prosperi, No. 98-4605 (11th Cir.) (201 F.3d 1335) (January 28, 2000) (Judge Phyllis A. Kravitch) by Here, as a matter of first impression, the Court held that 18 USC § 513(c)(1), which proscribes the the making of counterfeit securities, does not require proof of similitude to the genuine …
Article • June 1, 1998 • from P&J June, 1998
U.S. v. Wyjack, No. 97-50630 (5th Cir.) (141 F.3d 181) (May 7, 1998) (Per Curiam) by Court held that it is not necessary for the district court to conduct a "far reaching inquiry" under § 2B5.1(b)(2) to determine whether the notes were "obviously counterfeit.".
Article • June 1, 1998 • from P&J June, 1998
U.S. v. Bollman, No. 97-40998 (5th Cir.) (141 F.3d 184) (May 7, 1998) (Per Curiam) by Case held that the district court did not clearly err by finding that the counterfeit items were not "so obviously counterfeit" as to preclude application of enhancement contained in § 2B5.1(b)(2).
Article • August 1, 1997 • from P&J August, 1997
U.S. v. Rosario, No. 96-5286 (3rd Cir.) (118 F.3d 160) (July 10, 1997) (Judge Timothy K. Lewis) by This case is noted for Judge Nygaard's dissent in which he stated: "The government argues that the combination of wholly ambiguous tertimony from a handwriting expert and equivical testimony from a witness …
Article • June 1, 1997 • from P&J June, 1997
U.S. v. Pebworth, No. 95-5840 (4th Cir.) (112 F.3d 168) (April 29, 1997) (Judge J. Michael Luttig) by The defendant in this case was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 513(b) - one of those incredibly broad modern-day statutes that makes it a crime to possess "an implement designed for …
Article • April 1, 1997 • from P&J April, 1997
U.S. v. Webster, No. 96-30159 (9th Cir.) (108 F.3d 1156) (March 12, 1997) (Judge Eugene A. Wright) by Here, in examining the "purports to be genuine language" contained in USSG § 2B5.1, the Court held that it was not necessary for the Government to prove the common law similitude requirement …
Article • April 1, 1996 • from P&J April, 1996
U.S. v. Miller, No. 94-5951 (4th Cir.) (77 F.3d 71) (March 6, 1996) (Judge Clyde H. Hamilton) by Here the Court explained that the purpose of the enhancement contained in § 2B5.1(b)(2) is to provide harsher sentences for individuals who possess counterfeiting devices and produce counterfeit instruments, rather than persons …