29 Cited authorities

Bousley v. United States
523 U.S. 614 (1998) Cited 13,662 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that the rule announced in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472, which narrowed the scope of the term "use" in § 924(c), applied retroactively
Neder v. United States
527 U.S. 1 (1999) Cited 4,961 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless
Skilling v. U.S.
561 U.S. 358 (2010) Cited 1,657 times 57 Legal Analyses
Holding that Hedgpeth's harmless-error approach applies on direct appeal
Bruton v. United States
391 U.S. 123 (1968) Cited 8,937 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause is violated when the court admits an incriminating out-of-court statement by a nontestifying codefendant
McNally v. United States
483 U.S. 350 (1987) Cited 1,102 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding that the mail fraud statute is "limited in scope to the protection of property rights"
United States v. Denedo
556 U.S. 904 (2009) Cited 422 times 6 Legal Analyses
Finding that a military court's jurisdiction to issue the writ of coram nobis "derives from the earlier jurisdiction it exercised to hear and determine the validity of the conviction on direct review"
United States v. Morgan
346 U.S. 502 (1954) Cited 1,856 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that writ of error coram nobis was appropriate vehicle for prisoner's request that prior conviction be vacated for failure to advise him of his right to counsel, and where "no other remedy [was] then available and sound reasons exist[ed] for failure to seek appropriate earlier relief"
Evans v. United States
504 U.S. 255 (1992) Cited 375 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government was required to prove a quid pro quo existed—meaning an official accepted something of value in exchange for agreeing to take or taking official acts to qualify as Hobbs Act extortion
U.S. v. Cross
308 F.3d 308 (3d Cir. 2002) Cited 408 times
Holding that although the Government has the burden of showing that an error was harmless, a reviewing court can affirm for any reasons supported by the evidence
Obado v. New Jersey
328 F.3d 716 (3d Cir. 2003) Cited 305 times
Holding that restitutionary payments being made by a petitioner after he completed his state prison sentence did not satisfy the custody requirement of the federal habeas corpus statute when he was no longer subject to the terms of his probation
Section 2255 - Federal custody; remedies on motion attacking sentence
28 U.S.C. § 2255 Cited 129,766 times 129 Legal Analyses
Adopting one-year limitations period for §2255 motions
Section 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
18 U.S.C. § 371 Cited 21,501 times 140 Legal Analyses
Requiring proof of an "act to effect the object of the conspiracy"
Section 1341 - Frauds and swindles
18 U.S.C. § 1341 Cited 13,429 times 104 Legal Analyses
Relating to mail fraud
Section 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television
18 U.S.C. § 1343 Cited 12,011 times 171 Legal Analyses
Barring fraudulent schemes "for obtaining money or property"
Section 1651 - Writs
28 U.S.C. § 1651 Cited 11,062 times 60 Legal Analyses
Granting us the power to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of [our] . . . jurisdiction[] and agreeable to the usages and principles of law"
Section 1956 - Laundering of monetary instruments
18 U.S.C. § 1956 Cited 9,328 times 141 Legal Analyses
Defining “specified unlawful activity” to include, inter alia, controlled substance violations, murder, bribery, smuggling, various forms of fraud, concealment of assets, various environmental offenses, and health care offenses

USA v. Mariano et al

29 Cited authorities

Holding that the rule announced in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472, which narrowed the scope of the term "use" in § 924(c), applied retroactively

Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless

Holding that Hedgpeth's harmless-error approach applies on direct appeal

Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause is violated when the court admits an incriminating out-of-court statement by a nontestifying codefendant

Holding that the mail fraud statute is "limited in scope to the protection of property rights"

Finding that a military court's jurisdiction to issue the writ of coram nobis "derives from the earlier jurisdiction it exercised to hear and determine the validity of the conviction on direct review"

Holding that writ of error coram nobis was appropriate vehicle for prisoner's request that prior conviction be vacated for failure to advise him of his right to counsel, and where "no other remedy [was] then available and sound reasons exist[ed] for failure to seek appropriate earlier relief"

Holding that the government was required to prove a quid pro quo existed—meaning an official accepted something of value in exchange for agreeing to take or taking official acts to qualify as Hobbs Act extortion

Holding that although the Government has the burden of showing that an error was harmless, a reviewing court can affirm for any reasons supported by the evidence

Holding that restitutionary payments being made by a petitioner after he completed his state prison sentence did not satisfy the custody requirement of the federal habeas corpus statute when he was no longer subject to the terms of his probation

Adopting one-year limitations period for §2255 motions

Requiring proof of an "act to effect the object of the conspiracy"

Relating to mail fraud

Barring fraudulent schemes "for obtaining money or property"

Granting us the power to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of [our] . . . jurisdiction[] and agreeable to the usages and principles of law"

Defining “specified unlawful activity” to include, inter alia, controlled substance violations, murder, bribery, smuggling, various forms of fraud, concealment of assets, various environmental offenses, and health care offenses