18 U.S.C. § 472

50 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States v. Figueroa
  818 F.2d 1020· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 98×
  The court held that the Secret Service had probable cause to arrest the defendant, and his subsequent statements were admissible. The court also found that the admission of coconspirator testimony and agent testimony was proper.
• United States v. Johnson
  478 F.2d 1129· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-17 ·cited 97×
  The trial court abused its discretion by denying a severance to a defendant whose co-defendant's confession and defense strategy directly implicated and contradicted his own.
• United States v. Gerard
  491 F.2d 1300· 9th Cir.· 1974-02-06 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the superseding indictment and subsequent conviction on the added count constitute 'new facts' justifying a sentence greater than previously indicated, distinguishing it from cases involving judicial vindictiveness.
• United States v. Gleeson
  411 F.2d 1091· 10th Cir.· 1969-05-29 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict all appellants, and that various procedural and evidentiary rulings by the trial court did not constitute an abuse of discretion or reversible error.
• United States v. Cluchette
  465 F.2d 749· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-08 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, jury instructions were adequate, admissions were voluntary, and sentencing was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Johnson
  434 F.2d 827· 9th Cir.· 1970-10-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the conviction for passing counterfeit notes (Count I) was affirmed because the notes sufficiently resembled genuine currency, but the conviction for possessing counterfeit notes (Count II) was reversed due to insufficient resemblance.
• United States v. Pasquale Cioffi and Eugene Robert Ciuzio
  487 F.2d 492· 2d Cir.· 1973-07-16 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the convictions must be reversed due to an erroneous jury instruction on the definition of 'use' under 18 U.S.C. § 501, but a retrial is permissible.
• United States v. Heisman
  503 F.2d 1284· 8th Cir.· 1974-10-10 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a co-tenant's consent to search a separate, private room of another co-tenant is invalid if the consenting party lacks joint access or control over that specific room. The court also held that probable cause existed for Radford's arrest and the subsequent sear
• United States v. Freeman
  816 F.2d 558· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-21 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to suppress statements and evidence, compel informant disclosure, admit hearsay for investigative background, or deny a continuance to retain counsel.
• United States v. Ible
  630 F.2d 389· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-14 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the trial judge's conduct of voir dire.
• United States v. Derrell Darnell Hamilton
  684 F.2d 380· 6th Cir.· 1982-08-02 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by failing to give a requested alibi instruction for Counts One and Two, but found no error in the admission of identification evidence or prior act evidence.
• United States v. Sanford
  673 F.2d 1070· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 30×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for possession and transfer of counterfeit notes are improper when the sole evidence of possession stems from the transfer itself. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress and the rejection of the ineffective assistanc
• United States v. Philbert Ray Smith
  907 F.2d 133· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-31 ·cited 28×
  The court held that upon revocation of probation, the district court must impose a sentence available at the time of initial sentencing, as determined by the Sentencing Reform Act and guidelines, and cannot recalculate the offense level based on post-sentencing conduct.
• United States v. Barber
  557 F.2d 628· 8th Cir.· 1977-06-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the arrest of Keller was not supported by probable cause, requiring suppression of evidence and a new trial.
• United States v. Ritz
  548 F.2d 510· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-28 ·cited 28×
  The court held that calling a witness who the prosecution knows will invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege, especially when the witness is closely related to the defendants, constitutes reversible error due to the unfair prejudice created by the jury's inference of guilt from the
• United States v. Wilkerson
  469 F.2d 963· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of a co-conspirator's statement, even if technically hearsay, was not reversible error when the declarant testified and was cross-examined, and that convictions for possession and transfer of counterfeit currency were permissible for distinct tra
• United States v. Nemecio Cervantes
  466 F.2d 736· 7th Cir.· 1972-03-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove a single conspiracy to make and pass counterfeit money, and that each defendant was a knowing member. The court also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance motions.
• Kniess v. United States
  413 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1969-07-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that passing forged postal money orders is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 500, not 18 U.S.C. § 472, due to historical legislative intent and distinct penalty structures.
• United States v. Keller
  512 F.2d 182· 3d Cir.· 1975-03-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions on counts I and III due to a lack of identification and corroboration, but affirmed convictions on the remaining counts.
• Barbee v. United States
  392 F.2d 532· 5th Cir.· 1968-02-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that possession of altered currency with intent to defraud, even without intent to pass the altered currency, violates 18 U.S.C. § 472.
• Uldarico Lozano-Giron v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  506 F.2d 1073· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-04 ·cited 20×
  A permanent resident alien's return to the United States after a 27-day trip for the purpose of marriage, during which he engaged in currency conversion and discovered counterfeit money, constituted an 'entry' under the Immigration and Nationality Act, making him deportable.
• United States v. Jiminez-Serrato
  451 F.2d 523· 5th Cir.· 1971-11-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government failed to present substantial evidence proving the defendant's knowledge that the bills were counterfeit.
• United States v. Leach
  749 F.2d 592· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to dismiss, suppress statements, or for acquittal, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Pitts
  508 F.2d 1237· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-10 ·cited 16×
• Neville v. United States
  272 F.2d 414· 5th Cir.· 1959-11-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that indictments for counterfeiting offenses do not need to set forth the counterfeit instruments, as long as they sufficiently advise the defendant of the charge and prevent double jeopardy.
• United States v. Turner
  864 F.2d 1394· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-05 ·cited 14×
  A sentence must be vacated if it is based on misinformation of constitutional magnitude, which includes both improper considerations and materially inaccurate information.
• United States v. Lamonge
  458 F.2d 197· 6th Cir.· 1972-03-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that even though wiretap evidence was obtained illegally and admitted improperly, the cautionary instructions to the jury were sufficient to cure any prejudice, especially given the defendant's exclusive reliance on an entrapment defense.
• United States v. Alea
  433 F.2d 948· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the defendant's intent to defraud when passing counterfeit money.
• United States v. Franke
  409 F.2d 958· 7th Cir.· 1969-04-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the denial of the double jeopardy motion was proper because the original indictment was dismissed on the defendants' motion, and any error in admitting eavesdropped testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Griggs
  651 F.2d 396· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-24 ·cited 10×
  The doctrine of collateral estoppel bars the government from relitigating the issue of whether the defendant knew the counterfeit bills were counterfeit for Count V of the second indictment, but not for Counts I through IV.
• United States v. Finnerty
  470 F.2d 78· 3d Cir.· 1972-11-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sufficient evidence remained to support the jury's finding of knowledge regarding the counterfeit note transaction.
• United States v. Fachini
  466 F.2d 53· 6th Cir.· 1972-08-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the complaint and arrest warrant were valid, and even if the warrant were invalid, the search of the defendant's person incident to a lawful arrest was valid.
• United States v. Davis
  441 F.2d 28· 9th Cir.· 1971-04-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search of the defendant was unlawful because the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to believe he was armed and dangerous.
• United States v. Anzalone
  626 F.2d 239· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-26 ·cited 8×
  District of Columbia Armory Board bonds are not 'obligations or other securities of the United States' under federal counterfeiting statutes, and the intent to defraud is established even when counterfeit currency is given as a sample for potential customers to view.
• United States v. Sheppard
  455 F.2d 1081· 10th Cir.· 1972-03-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendants and that the searches incident to those arrests were valid, making the seized counterfeit bills admissible evidence.
• United States v. Brown
  348 F.2d 661· 2d Cir.· 1965-07-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if the identification testimony was hearsay, it was admissible because no proper objection was made at trial, and there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.
• Roberts v. United States
  331 F.2d 502· 9th Cir.· 1964-04-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the second count of the indictment, charging an attempt to pass a forged endorsement on a U.S. Treasury check, does not state an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 472.
• United States v. Caulton
  498 F.2d 412· 6th Cir.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for passing counterfeit bills was supported by ample evidence, and his claims regarding involuntary statements, discovery, and identification procedures were without merit.
• United States v. Dodd
  444 F.2d 1402· 8th Cir.· 1971-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction for passing altered federal reserve notes with intent to defraud.
• United States v. Hall
  801 F.2d 356· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the similitude jury instruction is not required for a charge of attempting to pass an altered obligation under 18 U.S.C. § 472, as the overt act of attempting to pass the obligation vitiates the need for similitude to prove intent to defraud.
• United States v. Wingender
  711 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-27 ·cited 4×
  A district court may modify a sentencing order to correct a mistake that makes sentences run consecutively rather than concurrently, if the original sentence was illegal or erroneous.
• United States v. Adcock
  651 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's statements, made during trial and to a Secret Service agent, was proper as they were relevant to proving intent for obstruction charges and did not violate hearsay rules or Rule 403.
• United States v. Brinda DeFILIPPIS
  637 F.2d 1370· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's scheme of passing altered bills, even without representing them as genuine, violated 18 U.S.C. § 472, and that any error in jury instructions regarding 'uttering' was harmless.
• United States v. Grabina
  295 F.2d 792· 2d Cir.· 1961-10-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for possessing and conspiring to possess counterfeit Federal Reserve Bank notes was valid.
• United States v. Ross
  844 F.2d 187· 4th Cir.· 1988-04-15 ·cited 2×
  A black and white photocopy of only one side of a dollar bill, which is obviously fake and not capable of deceiving an ordinary person, is not a "counterfeit obligation of the United States" under 18 U.S.C. §§ 471 and 472.
• United States v. Jens Roger Olson
  730 F.2d 544· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting agent testimony regarding fingerprint analysis and a witness's in-court identification, as the procedures were not impermissibly suggestive and the identification was reliable.
• United States v. Dykes
  460 F.2d 324· 9th Cir.· 1972-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a late motion to suppress and that the defendant was not deprived of effective counsel.
• Llerandi v. United States
  358 F.2d 676· 5th Cir.· 1966-03-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 473 (transferring counterfeit money) and 18 U.S.C. § 472 (possessing counterfeit money) constituted two distinct offenses, allowing for consecutive sentences.
• United States v. Lacey
  459 F.2d 86· 2d Cir.· 1972-04-17
  Inconsistent and false exculpatory statements by a defendant regarding how they obtained counterfeit currency can be sufficient circumstantial evidence from which a jury may infer guilty knowledge.
• United States v. Kane
  351 F.2d 600· 2d Cir.· 1965-10-14
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for possessing and conspiring to possess counterfeit money was valid, despite the unusual circumstances of the transaction.