MCGREGOR ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (68 total)

• State v. Percell J. Wise, 664 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
  …ent was prepared and mailed or where the statement was received. U.S. v. Wuagneux, 683 F. 2d 1343 (11th Cir.1982), cert, denied, 464 U.S. 814, 104 S.Ct. 69, 78 L.Ed.2d 83 (1983). Accord U.S. v. McGre-gor, 503 F. 2d 1167 (8th Cir.1974), cert, denied, 420 U.S. 926, 95 S.Ct. 1122, 43 L.Ed.2d 395 (1975) (use of mails to defraud may be prosecuted in district where communication sent or received). As we stated in Smith v. State, 532 So. 2d at 52, “[s]ection 836.10 is justified by the right of all persons to live…
• United States v. Brown, 540 F.2d 364 (8th Cir. 1976)
  …d, and (2) the mailing of a letter, etc., for the purpose of executing the scheme.” Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 8, 74 S.Ct. 358, 362, 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954); see United States v. Nance, [*374] 502 F. 2d 615, 618 (8th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 926, 95 S.Ct. 1123, 43 L.Ed.2d 396 (1975). Since the term “scheme to defraud” connotes some degree of planning by the perpetrator, it is essential that the evidence show the defendant entertained an intent to defraud. United States v. Nance, supra at 61…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• United States v. Harris, 542 F.2d 1283 (7th Cir. 1976)
  …ourt from ordering the production of statements of Government witnesses, even if they contain statements made by defendants, prior to the time the Government witnesses testify. United States v. Feinberg, 502 F. 2d 1180 (7th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 926, 95 S.Ct. 1122, 43 L.Ed.2d 396 (1975); United States v. Callahan, 534 F. 2d 763 (7th Cir. 1976). II. Adequacy of the Information Provided to the Defendants During Trial The defendants argue that the court committed reversible error in administerin…