Topic: support the inference that the defendant was aware of a hig… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #11453

7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 33 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Johnny Rivera, Elena Vila.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 United States v. Johnny Rivera, Elena Vila Anchor
ca11 · 1991
green “support the inference that the defendant was aware of a high probability of the existence of the fact in question and purposely contrived to avoid learning all of the facts in order to have a defense in the event of a subsequent prosecution.” 8
2 United States v. William W. Lilly
ca1 · 1992
green “whether a jury could plausibly find that the actions described in the disputed counts of the indictment, objectively viewed, constituted separate executions of the bank fraud scheme.” 5
3 United States v. James T. Labat
ca10 · 1990
green “in arriving at that figure, mr. brandon, i recognize that based on the pre-sentence report, you don't appear to have any assets at the present time but it appears that you have the prospect of receiving or inheriting some assets in the future.” 4
4 United States v. Johnny Rivera, Elena Vila
ca11 · 1991
green “only when the facts support the inference that the defendant was aware of a high probability of the existence of the fact in question and purposely contrived to avoid learning all of the facts in order to have a defense in the event of a subsequent prosecution.” 4
5 United States v. Claudia O'campo, United States v. Julian Redeondo
ca1 · 1992
green “includes conduct in furtherance of the conspiracy that was known to or was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant.” 4
6 United States v. William W. Lilly
ca1 · 1992
green “in order to obtain a single loan, the proceeds of which funded a single real estate purchase.” 4
7 United States v. Paul J. Savoie
ca1 · 1993
green “the financial resources of the defendant, the financial needs and earning ability of the defendant and the defendant's dependents, and such other factors as the court deems appropriate.” 4

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check