News & Analysis as of

Criminal Prosecution Supreme Court of the United States Appeals

WilmerHale

Second Circuit Decision Clarifies Scope of Honest Services Wire Fraud Statute

WilmerHale on

On July 2, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in United States v. Lopez that foreign commercial bribery schemes fall within the ambit of the honest services wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Second Circuit Rejects Challenge to Stratton Limits on Sentencing Enhancements

In United States v. Sterkaj, the Second Circuit (Cabranes, Raggi, and Nathan) vacated a sentence imposed on Klaudio Sterkaj because it represented an impermissible upward variance under United States v. Stratton, 820 F.2d 562...more

A&O Shearman

Supreme Court Decision Endorses Fraudulent-Inducement Theory Under Federal Wire Fraud Statute, Resolving Circuit Split And...

A&O Shearman on

On May 22, 2025, in a significant decision that clarifies the scope of the federal wire fraud statute and resolves a circuit split, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a pair of wire fraud convictions that had been premised on a...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Holds Intent to Cause Economic Harm is Not Required for Wire Fraud, Expanding Liability

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kousisis et al. v. United States clarifies that criminal federal wire fraud does not require that the defendant intended to cause the victim economic harm....more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Loss, No Problem: SCOTUS Expands Wire Fraud Reach in Kousisis Ruling

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States (the Court) issued its opinion in Kousisis v. United States, holding that a defendant may be convicted of wire fraud for inducing a victim to enter a contract under...more

Cooley LLP

US Supreme Court Upholds Wire Fraud Convictions, Says Economic Loss Not Required

Cooley LLP on

When an executive learns that she is being investigated for fraud, her first reaction often is: “But I didn’t intend for anyone to lose money!” This entirely understandable response may well be true (and lead the executive to...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Upholds Fraudulent Inducement Theory of Wire Fraud

Perkins Coie on

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed prosecutors’ ability to pursue mail and wire fraud charges under the “fraudulent inducement” theory. Under that theory, a defendant need not intend to cause...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

Recent Developments in the “Change in the Law” Reason for Compassionate Release

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

Over the last several years, thousands of incarcerated individuals have filed motions for compassionate release. As part of the submission process, individuals must outline the “extraordinary and compelling” reasons that...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - April 7, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in two cases: Ellingburg v. United States, No. 23-3129: This case addresses the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which the government...more

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,...

U.S. Supreme Court Draws the Line: Misleading Statements Aren’t Always False

Last week a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Thompson v. United States, 2025 WL 876266 (2025), holding that a statement that is literally true but allegedly misleading, is not a “false statement” under 18...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

U.S. Supreme Court rules misleading statements to FDIC not criminal

On March 21, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion regarding the meaning of “false statement” in 18 U.S.C. § 1014 which defines terms for those who knowingly make a false statement or report. The case’s petitioner had...more

Venable LLP

SCOTUS Dodges Confrontation Clause Case, but Justices Are Open to Reconsidering Crawford

Venable LLP on

The Supreme Court refusing to hear a case is nothing new, but an otherwise run-of-the-mill denial of the cert petition in Franklin v. New York, 604 U.S. ____ (2025) was accompanied by statements from Justices Alito and...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Second Circuit Rejects Double Jeopardy and Sufficiency of the Evidence Arguments After Remand in Ciminelli Case

In United States v. Aiello, the Second Circuit (Raggi, Chin, Sullivan) remanded the cases of Steven Aiello, Joseph Gerardi, Louis Ciminelli, and Alain Kaloyeros (collectively, the “defendant-appellants”) for retrial on their...more

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,...

Murder, Misogyny, and The Due Process Clause: U.S. Supreme Court Grapples With The Effect Of Unduly Prejudicial Evidence

In 2004, Appellant, Brenda Andrew was convicted in Oklahoma of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder for participating in the homicide of her husband to collect his life insurance policy. Andrew was...more

Perkins Coie

SCOTUS Seems Torn in Tangling With Fraudulent Inducement Theory of Federal Fraud Statutes

Perkins Coie on

On December 9, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in Kousisis v. United States. The case squarely assesses the validity of the “fraudulent inducement” theory of mail and wire fraud under federal...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - January 21, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Andrew v. White, No. 23-6573: In this case, the Court addressed whether the State violated petitioner Brenda Andrew’s due process rights when, during her...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: The Latest on Federal Court Treatment of Criminal Defendants

Last week, the Sixth Circuit and Supreme Court issued opinions on criminal law that could affect trial and sentencing strategy for white collar defendants in regulated industries. District court discretion does not...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

The U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Bronx DA’s Attempted End-Run Around Confrontation Clause

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

In Hemphill v. New York, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the defendant “did not forfeit his confrontation right merely by making [a] plea allocution arguably relevant to his theory of defense.” The Court rejected the attempt...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

The Ups And Downs (And Up Again?) Of A Batson Challenge

Fox Rothschild LLP on

In Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents prosecutors in criminal cases from exercising peremptory challenges to excuse...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - May 7, 2020

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Kelly v. United States, No. 18-1059: When the mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey refused to back then-Governor Chris Christie’s reelection campaign, the Governor’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Bridget Anne Kelly, and others punished the...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Cross-Border Investigations Update - September 2019

This issue of Skadden’s semiannual Cross-Border Investigations Update takes a close look at recent cases, regulatory activity and other key developments, including a review of the first year of GDPR enforcement, analysis of...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides McDonough v. Smith

On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided McDonough v. Smith, No. 18-485, holding that the statute of limitations for a fabricated-evidence claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 begins to run when the criminal...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - March 22, 2018

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions yesterday: Marinello v. United States, No. 16-1144: Petitioner Carlo Marinello was indicted in 2012 for violating criminal tax laws following investigations...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - July 2016

Employer Is Entitled To Recover $4 Million In Attorney's Fees From EEOC - CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, 578 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1642 (2016) - The EEOC filed suit against CRST (a trucking company) alleging...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Mata v. Lynch

On June 15, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Mata v. Lynch, No. 14-185, holding that federal courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (Board) rejection of an alien’s motion...more

26 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide