Mann Act

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

• United States v. Holcomb
  797 F.2d 1320· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Mann Act counts were insufficient due to the indictment's failure to mention the use of a common carrier, and that insufficient evidence supported Holcomb's convictions on other counts.
• United States v. Phelps
  733 F.2d 1464· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-07 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the limitations on cross-examination were proper, the reading of the tape summary was harmless error, and the refusal of a jury instruction was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Mason
  611 F.2d 49· 4th Cir.· 1979-12-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the simultaneous procurement and receipt of multiple firearms, and the simultaneous execution of multiple false statements on firearms transaction forms, constitute only one offense under the Gun Control Act, applying the rule of lenity due to statutory ambigu
• United States v. Green
  554 F.2d 372· 9th Cir.· 1977-05-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions under the Mann Act, the Act is not unconstitutional, and the appellants received a fair trial.
• Barringer v. United States
  399 F.2d 557· D.C. Cir.· 1968-03-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for separate robberies are permissible under the rule of lenity when the legislative purpose is to protect individual victims.
• EGE v. United States
  242 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1957-04-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Ege for causing transportation in interstate commerce for prostitution and that Ege and Boyd conspired to violate the Mann Act, but the evidence against Bruno was insufficient for a conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Harris
  534 F.2d 207· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the supplemented record was sufficient to determine the admissibility and prejudicial effect of Exhibit 71, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the exhibit.
• United States v. McCONNEY
  329 F.2d 467· 2d Cir.· 1964-03-23 ·cited 18×
  False statements made to law enforcement are insufficient to support a conviction for Mann Act violation when the evidence of the corpus delicti is otherwise weak and unproven.
• Nunnally v. United States
  291 F.2d 205· 5th Cir.· 1961-06-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support a Mann Act conviction, rejecting claims of insufficient evidence and fatal variance.
• United States v. Cohen
  177 F.2d 523· 2d Cir.· 1949-11-01 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge believes the conviction should be reversed because the prosecutor's summation unfairly prejudiced the jury by introducing irrelevant and inflammatory charges.
• United States v. Ahern
  612 F.2d 507· 10th Cir.· 1980-01-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of wives' testimony, denial of a new trial based on recantation, admission of evidence of other offenses, and sufficiency of evidence were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Burrell Billingslea
  603 F.2d 515· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellant's ongoing conduct of accepting CETA pay for hours worked at another job constituted a single offense, but each deposit of a student paycheck was a separate offense, making aggregation for a felony charge improper.
• The United States v. White
  553 F.2d 310· 2d Cir.· 1977-04-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of redacted hearsay statements of a murder victim was admissible under the against penal interest exception and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to poll the jury regarding a newspaper article.
• Oden v. United States
  410 F.2d 103· 5th Cir.· 1969-04-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance or admitting evidence of prior violent acts to show intent.
• Wagner v. United States
  171 F.2d 354· 5th Cir.· 1948-12-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under the Mann Act, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings.
• Helwig v. United States
  162 F.2d 837· 6th Cir.· 1947-07-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the jury instructions were not perfectly clear, newly discovered evidence regarding the appellant's intent to marry warranted a new trial.
• Oyama v. Oyama
  138 Fla. 422· Fla.· 1939-06-02 ·cited 15×
  Thomas Oyama appeals the dismissal of his bill seeking to cancel a property deed and mortgage executed pursuant to a marital settlement agreement with his wife Annette Oyama. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the dismissal but without prejudice, holding that disputes over the val
• United States v. Garrett
  521 F.2d 444· 8th Cir.· 1975-07-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Mann Act is constitutional and that the admission of the defendant's statement and the victim's testimony was proper.
• United States v. Lightfoot
  506 F.2d 238· D.C. Cir.· 1974-10-18 ·cited 14×
  The Court held that the defendant's purchase of a car with proceeds from illegal activity, without more, did not constitute 'distributing the proceeds of unlawful activity' under the Travel Act.
• United States v. Zemater
  501 F.2d 540· 7th Cir.· 1974-07-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the indictment's charge under the Travel Act was legally insufficient because it failed to allege the required sequence of interstate travel followed by an act in violation of state law in the place where committed. The court also vacated convictions on other
• United States v. Riley
  684 F.2d 542· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a guilty plea to a state pimping charge is admissible as a party admission in a federal Mann Act prosecution, and collateral estoppel does not bar the use of evidence from acquitted charges.
• United States v. Snow
  507 F.2d 22· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove that the defendant transported the woman for the purpose of prostitution, satisfying the dominant purpose test under the Mann Act.
• United States v. FOX
  425 F.2d 996· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the jury instructions, while imperfect regarding the timing of intent formation, did not constitute plain error given the facts presented, and that other contentions raised by the defendants lacked merit.
• Berry v. United States
  283 F.2d 465· 8th Cir.· 1960-10-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge's conduct and remarks disparaged the defendant in the eyes of the jury, preventing an impartial judgment, thus requiring a new trial.
• Ladakis v. United States
  283 F.2d 141· 10th Cir.· 1960-10-07 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court held that the defendant waived his right to appeal the admission of evidence by failing to move for a mistrial after the evidence was stricken and the jury instructed to disregard it.
• United States v. Fleenor
  162 F.2d 935· 7th Cir.· 1947-08-06 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence substantially supported the jury's findings regarding the defendant's intent and purpose in transporting women for prostitution.
• Poindexter v. United States
  139 F.2d 158· 8th Cir.· 1943-12-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not err in admitting testimony or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Wolf
  787 F.2d 1094· 7th Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the jury's verdict was supported by substantial evidence and that alleged trial errors were harmless.
• Nelms v. United States
  291 F.2d 390· 4th Cir.· 1961-06-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that two separate interstate transportations for prostitution, even if part of a broader pattern of conduct, constitute distinct offenses under the Mann Act.
• United States v. Marks
  274 F.2d 15· 7th Cir.· 1959-12-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for transporting a female across state lines for the purpose of debauchery, and that the trial court did not err in allowing impeachment of a government witness.
• Whitt v. United States
  261 F.2d 907· 6th Cir.· 1959-01-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the supplemental jury instructions, when read in conjunction with the original instructions, were not erroneous and correctly conveyed the applicable law regarding the Mann Act.
• United States v. Ross
  257 F.2d 292· 2d Cir.· 1958-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the commission of the crimes alleged in Counts Three and Four of the indictment.
• Dodson v. United States
  215 F.2d 196· 6th Cir.· 1954-08-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the mere consent of women transported for prostitution is insufficient to support their conviction for conspiracy under the Mann Act, and that circumstantial evidence must directly link a defendant to a conspiracy to sustain a conviction.
• Lawrence v. United States
  162 F.2d 156· 9th Cir.· 1947-05-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of similar conduct is admissible to prove intent and that prosecutorial cross-examination aimed at impeaching an impeachment witness is not prejudicial misconduct if objections are sustained.
• United States v. Oriolo
  146 F.2d 152· 3d Cir.· 1944-11-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's statement about resuming prostitution to pay a fine constituted a change in the trip's purpose, providing sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction under the Mann Act.
• Graham v. Squier
  132 F.2d 681· 9th Cir.· 1942-12-31 ·cited 10×
  The admission of a Selective Service Questionnaire into evidence, even if it violated Fifth Amendment rights, does not divest the trial court of jurisdiction and is therefore not grounds for habeas corpus relief.
• Simon v. United States
  145 F.2d 345· 4th Cir.· 1944-10-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the evidence sufficiently established the illicit purpose of transportation to fall within the purview of the Mann Act, and that the Act applies to non-commercialized vice.
• Miller v. United States
  142 F.2d 249· 6th Cir.· 1944-04-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the appeal was untimely and the proper procedure for the appellant to pursue is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• United States v. Kitowski
  729 F.2d 1418· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the unit of prosecution for interstate auto theft (18 U.S.C. § 2312) is each vehicle transported, and for disposing of stolen securities (18 U.S.C. § 2315) is each distinct disposal. However, transporting multiple counterfeit securities in a single trip consti
• United States v. Johnson
  553 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if the initial entry or search was illegal, the admission of the seized evidence was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Taitano
  442 F.2d 467· 9th Cir.· 1971-05-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a prosecutor's comment during closing arguments, while not ideal, was not a manifest violation of the defendants' right to remain silent, and that consecutive sentences for offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2421 and 2422 were permissible.
• United States v. Kotakes
  440 F.2d 342· 7th Cir.· 1971-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction under Count II of the Mann Act indictment, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or in denying the motion to dismiss for delay.
• United States v. Henderson
  434 F.2d 84· 6th Cir.· 1970-11-10 ·cited 8×
• United States v. Smith
  432 F.2d 1109· 7th Cir.· 1970-10-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that evidence of prior similar acts, even if remote, is admissible to prove criminal intent and impeach a defendant's statements, provided the jury is properly instructed on its limited use.
• Hattaway v. United States
  416 F.2d 1178· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied a fair trial due to the cross-examination regarding prior acts or the admission of rebuttal testimony, as proper objections were not made at trial.
• United States v. McCARTHY
  295 F.2d 356· 7th Cir.· 1961-10-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the indictment and the defendant's testimony were not erroneous.
• Bell v. United States
  213 F.2d 629· 6th Cir.· 1954-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The transportation of two women simultaneously in violation of the Mann Act constitutes two separate offenses, not one.
• Thomas v. Hudspeth
  127 F.2d 976· 10th Cir.· 1942-04-27 ·cited 8×
  A conviction on counts charging aiding and assisting in transportation is valid even if counts charging actual transportation for the same purpose result in acquittal, especially when sentences run concurrently.
• United States v. Hunt
  120 F.2d 592· 7th Cir.· 1941-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the alleged trial errors did not prejudice the defendants.
• United States v. Jessup
  966 F.2d 1354· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-11 ·cited 6×
  A district court may consider information obtained in violation of state law when determining sentencing, particularly when the information is relevant to acceptance of responsibility and was not obtained with the intent to increase the defendant's sentence.