15 Cited authorities

United States v. Bailey
444 U.S. 394 (1980) Cited 1,093 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that if a defendant fails to support one element of a defense, "the trial court and jury need not be burdened with testimony supporting other elements"
Liparota v. United States
471 U.S. 419 (1985) Cited 644 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Government is not required to "introduce any extraordinary evidence that would conclusively demonstrate petitioner's state of mind .... [but rather] may prove [the defendant's knowledge] by reference to facts and circumstances surrounding the case"
Llaguno v. Mingey
763 F.2d 1560 (7th Cir. 1985) Cited 156 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that detention of forty-two hours violated arrestee's Fourth Amendment rights, where officers learned early in the detention that arrestee would not be charged and the only reason for delay was that police were trying to build a case against arrestee, and reversing jury verdict in favor of defendants and directing verdict in arrestee's favor
United States v. Blagojevich
794 F.3d 729 (7th Cir. 2015) Cited 34 times
Affirming that mistake of law is no defense to wire fraud
U.S. v. Hill
252 F.3d 919 (7th Cir. 2001) Cited 55 times
Holding that waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent despite the district court's failure to conduct an exhaustive Faretta colloquy
United States v. McKnight
665 F.3d 786 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 24 times
In LG Display, the court acknowledged that a claim-by-claim analysis might yield a finding that individual consumers were real parties in interest even, if the state attorney general also had parens patriae standing in the lawsuit.
U.S. v. Prude
489 F.3d 873 (7th Cir. 2007) Cited 26 times
No. 06-1425. Argued December 6, 2006. Decided June 14, 2007. Appeal from the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Rudolph T. Randa, Chief Judge. Gordon P. Giampietro (argued), Gregory J. Haanstad, Office of the United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Joshua T. Buchman, Purvi G. Patel (argued), McDermott, Will Emery, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant. Before POSNER, RIPPLE and WOOD, Circuit Judges. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. On June 28, 2005, Kimberly Prude was indicted on one count
U.S. v. Kilgore
591 F.3d 890 (7th Cir. 2010) Cited 20 times
Noting “it is hornbook law that ignorance of the law is generally no defense” (citing Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 199, 111 S.Ct. 604, 112 L.Ed.2d 617 (1991))
Heater v. Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
497 F.2d 1243 (7th Cir. 1974) Cited 75 times
Finding employer liable for damages from heart attack resulting from back surgery necessitated by railroad's negligence
United States v. Clarke
801 F.3d 824 (7th Cir. 2015) Cited 9 times
Holding that defendant's tax returns "demonstrate that knowledge [of falsity] on their face" where they listed income and fiduciary fees of $900,000 "without identifying how this income was obtained" and claiming withholdings of $300,000 even though "no such funds were ever withheld"
Section 1348 - Securities and commodities fraud
18 U.S.C. § 1348 Cited 268 times 41 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting schemes to obtain certain property "by means of false or fraudulent pretenses"
Section 6c - Prohibited transactions
7 U.S.C. § 6c Cited 214 times 32 Legal Analyses
Defining "spoofing" under the Commodity Exchange Act

USA v. Coscia

15 Cited authorities

Holding that if a defendant fails to support one element of a defense, "the trial court and jury need not be burdened with testimony supporting other elements"

Holding that the Government is not required to "introduce any extraordinary evidence that would conclusively demonstrate petitioner's state of mind .... [but rather] may prove [the defendant's knowledge] by reference to facts and circumstances surrounding the case"

Affirming that mistake of law is no defense to wire fraud

Holding that waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent despite the district court's failure to conduct an exhaustive Faretta colloquy

In LG Display, the court acknowledged that a claim-by-claim analysis might yield a finding that individual consumers were real parties in interest even, if the state attorney general also had parens patriae standing in the lawsuit.

Noting “it is hornbook law that ignorance of the law is generally no defense” (citing Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 199, 111 S.Ct. 604, 112 L.Ed.2d 617 (1991))

Finding employer liable for damages from heart attack resulting from back surgery necessitated by railroad's negligence

Holding that defendant's tax returns "demonstrate that knowledge [of falsity] on their face" where they listed income and fiduciary fees of $900,000 "without identifying how this income was obtained" and claiming withholdings of $300,000 even though "no such funds were ever withheld"

Prohibiting schemes to obtain certain property "by means of false or fraudulent pretenses"

Defining "spoofing" under the Commodity Exchange Act