18 U.S.C. § 10
Expenditures made pursuant to this Act shall be subject to audit by the Comptroller General and his authorized representatives, who shall have access to all records relating to such expenditures. The Comptroller General shall transmit a report of the results of any such audit to the Committees on Appropriations, Committees on the Judiciary, and Committees on Government Operations [now Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the House of Representatives and Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate] of the House of Representatives and the Senate, respectively.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 76
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1944–2021 · leading case: McElroy v. United States
McElroy v. United States (1982)
“" Title 18 U. S. C. § 10 provides that the "term `interstate commerce,' as used in this title, includes commerce between one State .”
Dennis v. United States (1951)
“670 , 671, 18 U. S. C. § 10 , now 18 U. S. C. § 2385 .”
United States v. Lentz (2008)
“See 18 U.S.C.A. § 10 (West 2000) (“The term ‘interstate commerce’, as used in [Title 18], includes commerce between one State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and another State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia.”
United States v. Weingarten (2011)
“who travels in foreign commerce, or conspires to do so, for the purpose of engaging in any sexual act (as defined in section 2246) with a person under 18 years of age that would be in violation of chapter 109A if the sexual act occurred in the special maritime and territorial…”
United States v. Goldberg, Ronald J. (1987)
“§ 1343 and § 2314 incorporates the definition of “foreign commerce” in 18 U.S.C. § 10 : “The term ‘foreign commerce’, as used in this title, includes commerce with a foreign country.”
Gary Carson v. State (2017)
“The court sentenced Williams to death, noting 7 18 U.S.C.A. § 10 (West, Westlaw through P.”
United States v. Paul Ajlouny (1980)
“The definitions of “interstate commerce” and “foreign commerce” are set out in 18 U.S.C. § 10 (1976): The term “interstate commerce” .”
United States v. Walker (2011)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 10 . 5 . Our conclusion is not affected by the appellant's use of the phrase "Just Jolting" after noting that a fellow inmate had offered to perform a “free killing.”
United States v. Michael Smith (2016)
“§ 1512 (k) (Count 6); one count of obstruction of justice for falsifying documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1519 (Count 7); two counts of obstruction of justice for misleading conduct, in violation of 18 NS.”
United States v. Edward Rosario Polanco (2006)
“18 U.S.C. § 10 defines “interstate commerce” to include commerce between territories and possessions, as well as States: The term “interstate commerce”, as used in this title, includes commerce between one State, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia and another…”
United States v. Michael Lewis Clark (2006)
“” 18 U.S.C. § 10 . Admittedly, this definition is not particularly helpful given its rearrangement of the words being defined in the definition itself.”
United States v. Keith Reed (2015)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 10 (defining “interstate commerce” as including “commerce between one State” and “the District of Columbia”); United States v.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.