18 U.S.C. § 1167
Theft from gaming establishments on Indian lands
1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–322, § 330016(1)(S), substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $100,000”.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–322, § 330016(1)(U), substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $250,000”.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1991–2015 · leading case: Griffith v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola
Griffith v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola (2009)
“18 U.S.C. §§ 1167 and 1168 criminalize thefts from Indian casinos.”
United States v. Moore (2009)
“Knutson and Moore were eventually indicted for conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1167 (b), which penalizes anyone who “abstracts, purloins, wilfully misapplies, or takes and carries away with intent to steal” money that belongs to a gaming establishment run by an Indian tribe.”
United States v. Arlyn Ackley (2002)
“Ackley appeals his October 2000 conviction on Counts II and III of a three-count indictment which charged theft from a gaming establishment in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1167 (b) and 2. 1 The district court granted the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on Count I which…”
State v. Gohl (1991)
“§ 1167 (1988), entitled “Theft from gaming establishments on Indian lands” provides: "(a) Whoever abstracts, purloins, willfully misapplies, or takes and carries away with intent to steal, any money, funds, or other property of a value of $1,000 or less belonging to an…”
United States v. Bryant (2012)
“Bryant admits stealing from the casino, but claims she did so as an outsider, not as an employee, which is punishable by a different law, 18 U.S.C. § 1167 — the “proper” law, in her view, to have been charged under.”
United States v. Nam Quoc Le (2015)
“Defendant Nam Quoc Le pleaded guilty to a single count of Theft From Gaming Establishments on Indian Lands, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1167 , based on a cheating scheme that ran from at least January 14, 2013, to February 16, 2013.”
United States v. Ackley, Arlyn (2002)
“Ackley appeals his October 2000 conviction on Counts II and III of a three-count indictment which charged theft from a gaming establishment in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1167 (b) and 2.1 The district court granted the defend- 1 On April 5, 2001, Ackley was sentenced to thirty…”
United States v. Moore (2007)
“OPINION Defendants have abandoned their jurisdictional challenge based on their claim that the casino was not the actual victim, so this case turns on one issue only: *571 whether defendants’ conspiracy was intended to achieve a particular illegal end, made criminal under 18…”
United States v. Darwin Moore (2009)
“Knutson and Moore were eventually indicted for con- spiring to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1167 (b), which penalizes anyone who “abstracts, purloins, wilfully misapplies, or takes and carries away with intent to steal” money that belongs to a gaming establishment run by an Indian tribe.”
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.