Citation network
Schmuck Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 22, 1989
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Schmuck v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 489 U.S. 705 (1989) U.S. Supreme Court Schmuck v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 489 U.S. 705 (1989) Schmuck v. UnitedSearch
-
s relationship of trust and goodwill with the dealers upon whose unwitting cooperation the scheme depended. Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
and United States v. MazeSearch
-
for determining what constitutes a lesser included offense for the purpose of Rule 31(c). See, e.g., United States v. WhitakerSearch
-
Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
of the execution of the fraud, however, the use of the mails need not be an essential element of the scheme. Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
Badders v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 394 (1916). Schmuck, relying principally on this Court's decisions in Kann, supra, Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 363 U. S. 370 (1960), and United States v. MazeSearch
-
the mailing element of the mail fraud offense. The mailings here fit this description. See, e.g., United States v. LocklearSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
United States v. GallowaySearch
-
United States v. ShryockSearch
-
Court has found the elements of mail fraud to be satisfied where the mailings have been routine. See, e.g., Carpenter v. UnitedSearch
-
approach formulated in United States v. WhitakerSearch
-
Stirone v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MillerSearch
-
is based at least in part on the right of the defendant to notice of the charge brought against him. United States v. WhitakerSearch
-
See Keeble v. UnitedSearch
-
The nature of that prevailing practice is clear. In Giles v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 861, quoting House v. StateSearch
-
N.E. 647, 648 (1917). This approach, moreover, was applied consistently by state courts. Indeed, in State v. HenrySearch
-
The California Supreme Court, in People v. KerrickSearch
-
State v. MarshallSearch
-
Wachowicz v. MartinSearch
-
N.Y. 361, Page 489 U. S. 720 364, 57 N.E.2d 53, 54-55 (1944). This Court's decision in Stevenson v. UnitedSearch
-
Keeble v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. WhitakerSearch
-
U.S.App.D.C. 344, 349, 447 F.2d 314, 319 (1971) (inherent relationship test), and United States v. MartinSearch
-
F.2d 1449, 1451 (CA9 1986) (same), with United States v. CampbellSearch
-
F.2d 760, 761-762 (CA8 1981) (elements test), and Government of Virgin Islands v. JosephSearch
-
that a jury could rationally find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense, yet acquit him of the greater. Keeble v. UnitedSearch
-
Rule 31(c)'s provision for lesser offense instructions benefits the defendant, as well. The Court recognized in Keeble v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 412 U. S. 213 . See also Sansone v. UnitedSearch
-
Durland v. UnitedSearch
-
in which a mailing predictably and necessarily occurs. The mailing must be in furtherance of the fraud. In Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 323 U. S. 94 . We held to the same effect in United States v. MazeSearch
-
on the officials' causing tax bills to be sent by mail (and thus tax payments to be received) every year. Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Schmuck v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. WhitakerSearch
-
Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. LocklearSearch
-
United States v. ShryockSearch
-
Carpenter v. UnitedSearch
-
In Giles v. UnitedSearch
-
House v. StateSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial