TATE

v.

WOOD, SUPERINTENDENT, WASHINGTON STATE PENITENTIARY

Citator

Cited By

• Directv, Inc. v. Brown, 371 F.3d 814 (11th Cir. 2004)
  …review in this appeal. The issue whether liquidated damages under section 2520(c)(2) are mandatory is purely a matter of statutory interpretation subject to de novo review. United States v. Veal, 153 F. 3d 1233, 1245 (11th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1147, 119 S.Ct. 2024, 143 L.Ed.2d 1035 (1999). If this Court concludes that liquidated damages are not mandatory and then reaches the alternative argument that damages should have been awarded, the review is for abuse of discretion. See Reynolds v. Spe…
• United States v. Ronda, 455 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2006)
  …) with the intent to hinder, delay or prevent the communication of information to a federal official, (3) about the commission or the possible commission of a federal crime. United States v. Veal, 153 F. 3d 1233, 1253 (11th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1147, 119 S.Ct. 2024, 143 L.Ed.2d 1035 (1999). More specifically, Count One of the indictment charged that by planting the guns and lying about the shootings, the defendants conspired to hinder the communication of information about the shootings to fed…
• United States v. Nicky Tampas, 493 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2007)
  …or prevent the communication of information to a federal law enforcement officer, 3) about the commission or the possible commission of a federal crime. 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b); United States v. Veal, 153 F. 3d 1233, 1253 (11th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1147, 119 S.Ct. 2024, 143 L.Ed.2d 1035 (1999). This charge was based on Tampas’s actions in asking Arambula to make a spreadsheet attributing two years’ worth of Patrick’s hand receipts to jobs Patrick’s company performed at the YMCA. See Veal, 153 F.…