GRAY

v.

ILLINOIS

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• United States v. Lemire, 720 F.2d 1327 (D.C. Cir. 1983)
  …, 763 n. 1 (7th Cir.1983); United States v. Computer Sciences Corp., 689 F. 2d 1181, 1188 n. 14 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 103 S.Ct. 729, 74 L.Ed.2d 953 (1983); United States v. Giovengo, 637 F. 2d 941, 944 (3d Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1032, 101 S.Ct. 1743, 68 L.Ed.2d 228 (1981). . 18 U.S.C. § 1343 provides: Whoever, having devised or intended to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or…
• United States v. Yonn, 702 F.2d 1341 (11th Cir. 1983)
  …nt during his own argument, the government’s passing reference to the fact in rebuttal, taken in context, did not rise to the level of improper prosecutorial comment. See, e.g., United States v. Cotton, 631 F. 2d 63, 66 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1032, 101 S.Ct. 1743, 68 L.Ed.2d 227 (1981). In summary, a careful examination of the record and consideration of the defendants’ assignments of error discloses no reversible error in the trial court. Accordingly, the convictions of the appellants are…
• United States v. Eley, 723 F.2d 1522 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …itation to the prosecutor to protest to the contrary. We find the government’s comment a fair response to defendant’s attack on the government and not plain error. See generally United States v. Cotton, 631 F. 2d 63, 66 (5th Cir.1980); cert. denied, 450 U.S. 1032, 101 S.Ct. 1743, 68 L.Ed.2d 227 (1981); United States v. Hiett, 581 F. 2d 1199, 1204 (5th Cir.1978). We caution, however, that it is improper for a prosecutor to suggest to the jury that the Department of Justice or the United States Attorney’s Off…