Citation network
Evans Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 09, 1991
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
-
Evans v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 504 U.S. 255 (1991) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Evans V. UnitedSearch
-
does not require that a public official make a demand or request-unless it has instructed otherwise. See Morissette v. UnitedSearch
-
the jury to find duress-are rejected. The instruction satisfies the quid pro quo requirement of McCormick v. UnitedSearch
-
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, as we must in light of the verdict, see Glasser v. UnitedSearch
-
by the public official is required to support a conviction of extortion under color of official right. United States v. O'GradySearch
-
United States v. AguonSearch
-
Taylor v. UnitedSearch
-
direction may be taken as satisfaction with widely accepted definitions, not as a depar- 2 See United States v. GarnerSearch
-
United States v. SpitlerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
United States v. JannottiSearch
-
United States v. FrenchSearch
-
United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
United States v. HallSearch
-
Morissette v. UnitedSearch
-
see United States v. NardelloSearch
-
was intended to encompass the conduct held to be beyond the reach of the 1934 Act by our decision in United States v. TeamstersSearch
-
People v. BarondessSearch
-
under the early American statutes, including the later New York statute. See Lindgren 869,908. 10 In United States v. TeamstersSearch
-
an antilabor measure, but rather, it was a necessary measure in the wake of this Court's decision in United States v. TeamstersSearch
-
conduct by a private individual as well as conduct 11 In fact, the House Report sets out the text of United States v. TeamstersSearch
-
No. 238, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., 1-10 (1945). 12 This Court recognized the broad scope of the Hobbs Act in Stirone v. UnitedSearch
-
include the conduct of the private individual as well as the conduct of the public official. See, e. g., United States v. NardelloSearch
-
Bush v. StateSearch
-
People v. PeckSearch
-
see United States v. AguonSearch
-
of official right do not require proof that the inducement took the form of a threat or demand. See United States v. O'GradySearch
-
F. 2d, at 1166.17 16 See, e. g., United States v. HolzerSearch
-
United States v. PaschallSearch
-
by force or fear have occasionally said that extortion and bribery are mutually exclusive, see, e. g., People v. FeldSearch
-
York case in which the defendant was convicted of both bribery and extortion under color of official right, see People v. HansenSearch
-
and bribery are mutually exclusive crimes are cases involving extortion by fear and bribery, see, e. g., People v. FeldSearch
-
People v. DioguardiSearch
-
Act, so it could not have been a case on which Congress relied. We agree with the Seventh Circuit in United States v. BraaschSearch
-
are not mutually exclusive. United States v. KahnSearch
-
s criticism of the instruction, and conclude that it satisfies the quid pro quo requirement of McCormick v. UnitedSearch
-
that distinguished between payments for private services and payments for public services. See, e. g., Collier v. StateSearch
-
Post, at 281. 21 See, e. g., United States v. SwiftSearch
-
Syllabus Evans V. UnitedSearch
-
See Morissette v. UnitedSearch
-
of McCormick v. UnitedSearch
-
Glasser v. UnitedSearch
-
See United States v. GarnerSearch
-
United States v. TeamstersSearch
-
In United States v. TeamstersSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial