Mann Act

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

• United States v. Hiatt
  527 F.2d 1048· 9th Cir.· 1975-11-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for conspiracy to violate the Mann Act and Travel Act was supported by sufficient evidence and that the jury instructions were adequate.
• United States v. Norris Hewitson Kerr
  439 F.2d 689· 9th Cir.· 1971-03-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a discrepancy between the charged date and the proven date of the offense is not fatal if both fall within the statute of limitations and the complaining witness's minority. The conviction was also supported by sufficient corroboration.
• United States v. Snyder
  429 F.2d 1242· 9th Cir.· 1970-07-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the delay in bringing charges did not violate the defendant's due process rights, as the speedy trial right had not yet attached and the statute of limitations provided protection.
• United States v. English
  409 F.2d 200· 3d Cir.· 1969-04-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to give a specific jury instruction that no presumption arises from a defendant's failure to testify.
• Wilkerson v. United States
  342 F.2d 807· 8th Cir.· 1965-04-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the wife's testimony was admissible despite the spousal privilege exception, and that evidence of the defendant's violence was admissible to show intent.
• United States v. Nichol
  323 F.2d 633· 7th Cir.· 1963-10-10 ·cited 6×
  The jury verdict is justified by substantial evidence that the defendant transported his wife for the purpose of prostitution.
• Dingess v. United States
  315 F.2d 238· 4th Cir.· 1963-03-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel, as the trial attorney's decision not to call a witness was reasonable and did not prejudice the defense.
• Eisenberg v. United States
  273 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1959-12-17 ·cited 6×
  A prior inconsistent out-of-court statement, used by the prosecution to refresh a witness's recollection, is inadmissible as substantive evidence when the witness repudiates it and the prosecution claims neither surprise nor hostility.
• Beach v. United States
  149 F.2d 837· D.C. Cir.· 1945-06-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the grounds for reversal urged by the appellant were without merit, affirming the conviction.
• Beach v. United States
  144 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1944-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Mann Act, by its plain language and legislative history, applies to transportation for prostitution within the District of Columbia.
• United States v. Jones
  909 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1990-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions for the Travel Act were erroneous because they did not require proof of intent to violate specific state laws, and the evidence was insufficient to support the Mann Act conviction for 'transportation'.
• United States v. Earl Lamonte Parr (Earl Lament Parr) (aka Maurice Parr
  741 F.2d 878· 6th Cir.· 1984-08-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Congress intended to create two separate crimes under 18 U.S.C. § 2421 and § 2423, allowing for separate convictions from a single act of transporting a mixed group of adults and minors for prostitution.
• United States v. Harris
  480 F.2d 601· 6th Cir.· 1973-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction correctly stated that the essential element of the Mann Act offense is the defendant's dominant motive in transporting the females for an immoral purpose, not the dominant motive of the trip itself.
• United States v. St. John Tyler
  459 F.2d 647· 10th Cir.· 1972-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and properly admitted the victim's testimony, rejecting claims of unconstitutional vagueness and double jeopardy.
• United States v. Jeffrow Whitlock
  456 F.2d 1230· 10th Cir.· 1972-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's false testimony regarding his financial condition was material to the issues in the prior trial, and thus the perjury conviction was proper.
• United States v. Hicks
  389 F.2d 49· 3d Cir.· 1968-01-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a witness's alleged mental instability and motives for testifying do not render her incompetent to testify, but rather go to the weight the jury should give her testimony.
• Amos Lane Bridges v. United States
  376 F.2d 22· 5th Cir.· 1967-04-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge properly instructed the jury to disregard the prosecutor's opening statement and that the evidence supported the conviction under the Mann Act.
• United States v. Ross
  322 F.2d 306· 4th Cir.· 1963-09-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction and that the trial court did not err in refusing requested jury instructions.
• Fabianich v. United States
  302 F.2d 904· D.C. Cir.· 1962-05-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellants were not denied a fair trial and that their convictions were valid.
• Dailey v. United States
  259 F.2d 433· 7th Cir.· 1958-10-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sentences tied to a vacated sentence should be interpreted based on the court's original intent to impose a total sentence.
• Cleary v. United States
  163 F.2d 748· 9th Cir.· 1947-10-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, as the evidence was not shown to be newly discovered.
• Sink v. COX
  142 F.2d 917· 8th Cir.· 1944-05-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's claims regarding the first indictment were untimely and that he had not served the full term of his lawful sentences.
• United States v. Langley
  919 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court properly selected 18 U.S.C. § 2421 (Mann Act) as the most analogous federal offense to the underlying state prostitution offenses for sentencing purposes under the Travel Act.
• United States v. Pincione
  565 F.2d 404· 6th Cir.· 1977-11-16 ·cited 2×
  A general objection to a jury instruction, incorporating prior specific objections, is sufficient to preserve the issue for appeal.
• United States v. Miller
  358 F.2d 696· 6th Cir.· 1966-04-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of conspiracy to violate the Mann Act, as the jury could infer the conspiracy was formed before the interstate transportation.
• United States v. Dock Talbert
  357 F.2d 159· 4th Cir.· 1966-03-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the conviction on the fourth count must be reversed due to insufficient evidence, while the conviction on the fifth count is affirmed.
• Buddy Leon Gordon and Paul Gene Gauwain v. United States
  353 F.2d 9· 5th Cir.· 1965-11-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury that a witness was an accomplice as a matter of law, nor was it error to admit evidence of appellant's marital status.
• Dailey v. United States
  303 F.2d 364· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prior appellate determination of sentencing intent was not reviewable, and the petitioner's presence was not required for the execution of the mandate.
• Perry v. United States
  297 F.2d 100· 8th Cir.· 1962-01-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's appeal was frivolous and without merit, and therefore denied his request to proceed in forma pauperis.
• Shane v. United States
  283 F.2d 355· 9th Cir.· 1960-08-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the questions asked of the witnesses were potentially incriminating and thus protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, reversing their contempt convictions.
• Becker v. United States
  217 F.2d 555· 8th Cir.· 1954-12-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence did not establish as a matter of law that the return trip was solely pursuant to an innocent intent, making it a jury question whether the defendant induced interstate travel for an illicit purpose.
• Rosenfield v. United States
  216 F.2d 260· 8th Cir.· 1954-10-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for violating the Mann Act and that the admission of certain testimony was not prejudicial error.
• United States v. Martin
  191 F.2d 569· 7th Cir.· 1951-07-11 ·cited 2×
  A woman's mere consent to and acquiescence in her transportation for immoral purposes is insufficient to support a conviction for conspiracy to violate the Mann Act.
• Qualls v. United States
  149 F.2d 891· 5th Cir.· 1945-07-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's conviction under the Mann Act.
• Proctor v. United States
  146 F.2d 724· 5th Cir.· 1944-12-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict on all counts of conspiracy and Mann Act violations.
• United States v. Castle
  925 F.2d 831· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-08
  Foreign officials cannot be prosecuted under the general conspiracy statute (18 U.S.C. § 371) for conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), as Congress evinced a clear intent to exempt them from prosecution.
• United States v. Johnson
  756 F.2d 453· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-06
  The court held that a jury instruction referring to a reasonable inference of intent, rather than a presumption, did not violate Sandstrom, and that singling out a defendant's testimony regarding their interest in the outcome was not reversible error.
• United States v. Roeder
  526 F.2d 736· 10th Cir.· 1975-11-07
  The transportation of a woman across state lines for the purpose of engaging in sexual acts for hire to produce a movie violates the Mann Act.
• United States v. Clemens
  478 F.2d 1178· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-15
• Haskel Edward Johnson v. United States
  422 F.2d 1329· 8th Cir.· 1970-03-20
  The court held that consecutive sentences for separate Mann Act violations were proper, as each count charged a distinct offense.
• United States v. DAY
  392 F.2d 192· 6th Cir.· 1968-04-11
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict for conspiracy to violate and substantive violation of the Mann Act.
• United States v. Blackburn
  389 F.2d 93· 6th Cir.· 1968-02-10
  The court held that the introduction of a pistol and notebook into evidence, obtained from the defendant's hotel room after arrest, did not constitute an illegal search and was harmless error, even if it were considered a search. The court also found no abuse of discretion in den
• Elward Baker v. United States
  255 F.2d 619· 9th Cir.· 1958-05-06
  The court held that the defendant's compulsion out of Arizona did not negate the required intent under the Mann Act, as the jury could have found a new purpose arose after a break in the journey.
• Graham v. United States
  154 F.2d 325· D.C. Cir.· 1946-03-25
  The court held that the defendants' actions did not constitute a conspiracy to 'transport or cause to be transported' women for prostitution under Section 2 of the Mann Act, as their conduct was more akin to inducing women to travel for appointments, not orchestrating transportat
• Haskett v. United States
  145 F.2d 465· 9th Cir.· 1944-11-15
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and the district court had jurisdiction.