18 U.S.C. § 1852

Timber removed or transported

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

Whoever cuts, or wantonly destroys any timber growing on the public lands of the United States; or

Whoever removes any timber from said public lands, with intent to export or to dispose of the same; or

Whoever, being the owner, master, pilot, operator, or consignee of any vessel, motor vehicle, or aircraft or the owner, director, or agent of any railroad, knowingly transports any timber so cut or removed from said lands, or lumber manufactured therefrom—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

This section shall not prevent any miner or agriculturist from clearing his land in the ordinary working of his mining claim, or in the preparation of his farm for tillage, or from taking the timber necessary to support his improvements, or the taking of timber for the use of the United States; nor shall it interfere with or take away any right or privilege under any existing law of the United States to cut or remove timber from any public lands.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 18 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1959–2024 · leading case: United States v. George T. Wilcox, Also Known as Tommy Wilcox, United States of Am. v. Roger Counts, Also Known as Tex Counts, 50 F.3d 600 (8th Cir. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. George T. Wilcox, Also Known as Tommy Wilcox, United States of Am. v. Roger Counts, Also Known as Tex Counts, 50 F.3d 600 (8th Cir. 1995). · cites it 4× “Roger “Tex” Counts and George “Tommy” Wilcox appeal their convictions for cutting and removing timber from United States public lands, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1852 (1988), and committing depredation in excess of $100.”

Walters v. Fid. Mortg. of California, Inc., 730 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (E.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 2× “in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1852 ; 6 and repeated violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.”

United States v. Bansal, 663 F.3d 634 (3rd Cir. 2011). “The District Court, which essentially read the elements of the definition from 18 U.S.C. § 1852 , committed no plain error.”

United States v. Isaac Fogel, 901 F.2d 23 (4th Cir. 1990). “§ 641 , and cutting timber growing on public lands of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1852 . He was found guilty on both counts and sentenced to fifteen days’ confinement in a halfway house, fined $20,000, ordered to perform 300 hours of community service, and…”

Downstate Stone Co., an Illinois Corp. v. United States of Am., 651 F.2d 1234 (7th Cir. 1981). · cites it 2× “§ 551 or 18 U.S.C. §§ 1852 thru 53, for acts done in conjunction with its mining operations on the subject premises.”

United States v. Arnold Gemmill, 535 F.2d 1145 (9th Cir. 1976). “At common law, growing trees were considered to be real, rather than personal property (5 American Law of Property § 19.”

United States v. Erik C. Schmidt, 930 F.3d 858 (7th Cir. 2019). “Because chopping and removing live trees from a national forest without a permit are federal offenses, see 18 U.S.C. §§ 1852 and 1853, Officer Brooks prepared to issue a citation.”

United States v. Sawyers, 186 F. Supp. 264 (N.D. Cal. 1960). · cites it 4× “(Counts 2, 3, 4 and 5 each charge a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1852 ). Defendant has moved, on various grounds, to dismiss the Indictment returned against him in this case.”

United States v. Casey Evans, 74 F.4th 597 (4th Cir. 2023). “Sawyers, the defendant was charged, inter alia, with cutting and removing timber from federal land in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1852 . 186 F. Supp. 264, 265 (N.”

United States v. Douglas A. Larsen, 596 F.2d 410 (10th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “Inasmuch as the Government could not prove that Larsen removed the illegally cut trees, he was charged in a misdemeanor information, with violating the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1852 (unlawful cutting of timber).”

Magnolia Motor & Logging Co., a Corp. v. United States, 264 F.2d 950 (9th Cir. 1959). “15 Appellant contends that the evidence,, if it showed any violation by appellant, showed only a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1852 16 or 18 U.S.C.A. § 1853 .”

United States v. Willie Langston, Charles Dean, Pete Melton, A/K/A Robert E. Melton, 903 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir. 1990). “They also were found guilty of several misdemeanor violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1852 and 2. Section 1852 prohibits cutting and removing timber from public lands.”

Show all 18 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.