Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining any loan or advance of credit from any person, partnership, association, or corporation with the intent that such loan or advance of credit shall be offered to or accepted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for insurance, or for the purpose of obtaining any extension or renewal of any loan, advance of credit, or mortgage insured by such Department, or the acceptance, release, or substitution of any security on such a loan, advance of credit, or for the purpose of influencing in any way the action of such Department, makes, passes, utters, or publishes any statement, knowing the same to be false, or alters, forges, or counterfeits any instrument, paper, or document, or utters, publishes, or passes as true any instrument, paper, or document, knowing it to have been altered, forged, or counterfeited, or willfully overvalues any security, asset, or income, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Harry Bernstein, 533 F.2d 775 (2d Cir. 1976).
· cites it 7× “§ 2 , and substantive false statement offenses in applications for mortgage insurance in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1010 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . All appellants were convicted of conspiracy, all appellants except Melvin Cardona of bribery, and all appellants except Rose Bernstein of…”
United States v. Louis A. Arky, 938 F.2d 579 (5th Cir. 1991).
· cites it 6× “Arky and Baumstein were indicted for conspiring to make false statements to HUD in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1010 , which is a violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Alexander, 679 F.3d 721 (8th Cir. 2012).
· cites it 5× “Following a jury trial, Appellant Meggan Alexander was convicted of one count of knowingly making false statements in connection with a loan offered for insurance by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1010 , and three counts of…”
United States v. Gertrude King Black & Bill Black, 644 F.2d 445 (5th Cir. 1981).
· cites it 5× “HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: Gertrude King Black and her husband, Bill Black, were charged in a nine-count indictment with making false statements to a federal agency in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1010 and 2, embezzling money belonging to the United States in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Harry Ellis, 50 F.3d 419 (7th Cir. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Ellis possessed a strong motive to conceal fraudulently his prior bankruptcies from the court.”
United States v. Hiram Stanley Sasser, II, 974 F.2d 1544 (10th Cir. 1992).
· cites it 2× “§ 1341 , and seven counts of making false statements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under 18 U.S.C. § 1010 . On appeal, Sasser raises the following eight arguments: (1) his prosecution for conspiracy, mail fraud and false statements was barred by the…”
United States v. Newell, 658 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011).
“The Third Circuit has held that the unanimity requirement extends to an indictment that includes “several transactions or occur *27 rences, any of which could constitute one of the acts proscribed by the charged statutes.”
United States v. Richard Paulus, 894 F.3d 267 (6th Cir. 2018).
“1985) (interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 1010 ). Ordinarily, facts are the only item that fits in this category; opinions-when given honestly-are almost never false.”
Jones v. State, 323 S.W.3d 885 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010).
“…be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. Moeller, 378 F.2d at 14 n. 1 (quoting 18 U.S.C.A. § 1010 ).”
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.