18 U.S.C. § 1302

Mailing lottery tickets or related matter

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whoever knowingly deposits in the mail, or sends or delivers by mail:

Any letter, package, postal card, or circular concerning any lottery, gift enterprise, or similar scheme offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance;

Any lottery ticket or part thereof, or paper, certificate, or instrument purporting to be or to represent a ticket, chance, share, or interest in or dependent upon the event of a lottery, gift enterprise, or similar scheme offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance;

Any check, draft, bill, money, postal note, or money order, for the purchase of any ticket or part thereof, or of any share or chance in any such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme;

Any newspaper, circular, pamphlet, or publication of any kind containing any advertisement of any lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme of any kind offering prizes dependent in whole or in part upon lot or chance, or containing any list of the prizes drawn or awarded by means of any such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme, whether said list contains any part or all of such prizes;

Any article described in section 1953 of this title—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both; and for any subsequent offense shall be imprisoned not more than five years.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 41 cases, 1951–2020 · leading case: Minnesota Newspaper Ass'n v. Postmaster Gen. of the United States, 677 F. Supp. 1400 (D. Minnesota 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Minnesota Newspaper Ass'n v. Postmaster Gen. of the United States, 677 F. Supp. 1400 (D. Minnesota 1987). · cites it 15× “Plaintiff Minnesota Newspaper Association (“MNA”) contends that the statutes, primarily 18 U.S.C. § 1302 (1982), violate the constitutional standards of free speech and press, and equal protection.”

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,007 Willie Bell, Jr. v. Health-Mor, Inc., 549 F.2d 342 (5th Cir. 1977). · cites it 3× “Second, whether a private right of action may be implied from the federal Mail Fraud and Lottery statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1302 , 1341. Defendants-appellees sell vacuum cleaners door to door, on a time-payment basis with the resulting consumer installment notes immediately…”

Iannelli v. United States, 420 U.S. 770 (1975). · cites it 2× “" [3] Petitioner Iannelli additionally was convicted of mailing gambling paraphernalia, 18 U. S. C. § 1302 , and using a fictitious name for the purpose of conducting unlawful bookmaking activities by means of the Postal Service.”

United States v. Garrett A. Tansley, A/K/A Jerry Tansley & Douglas Raymond Cox, A/K/A Doug Kelly, 986 F.2d 880 (5th Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “§ 1344 ; 4) the engagement of an unlawful lottery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1302 ; and 5) the laundering of monetary instruments, in violation of 18 U.”

United States Postal Serv. v. C.E.C. Servs., 869 F.2d 184 (2d Cir. 1989). · cites it 3× “Customs had intercepted over 13,000 pieces of mail, originating from CEC, that contained lottery material indicating a possible violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1302 (1982). That provision prohibits generally the sending of mail concerning lotteries or similar schemes offering prizes…”

State v. Reader's Digest Ass'n, 501 P.2d 290 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 2× “C. § 4005 . The Postmaster General has authority to dispose of any such matter which is deposited in the mails.”

Lezmond Mitchell v. United States, 790 F.3d 881 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “ed “a small but important development toward tribal self-determination” with respect to prosecutions by the federal government of crimes committed on tribal lands: the so-called tribal option, which allowed Native American tribes to decide whether the death penalty applies to…”

Frank v. Minnesota Newspaper Assn., Inc., 490 U.S. 225 (1989). · cites it 4× “Appellee filed suit in District Court to bar enforcement of 18 U. S. C. § 1302 , based on the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

United States v. Robert Elia Iannelli, A/K/A Bobby I, 528 F.2d 1290 (3rd Cir. 1976). “Appellant Iannelli was also convicted of violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1302 and 1342 (gambling offenses involving use of the United States Postal Service).”

Rhodes v. Consumers' Buyline, Inc., 868 F. Supp. 368 (D. Mass. 1993). · cites it 4× “A different federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1302 , criminalizes the mailing of lottery materials by any person.”

State Ex Inf. Danforth v. Reader's Digest Ass'n, 527 S.W.2d 355 (Mo. 1975). · cites it 3× “Mail because “respondent is subject only to the Federal Lottery Statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 1302 , and regulations promulgated by the U.”

Howard A. Blachly & Robert L. McMillen v. United States, 380 F.2d 665 (5th Cir. 1967). “Van Winkle and John Brunquardt, US DC WD Mo. 1965; United States v. Brown Alexander Mangum and James Ted Griffin, USDC WD N.”

Show all 41 citing cases →

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.