18 U.S.C. § 1966
Expedition of actions
In any civil action instituted under this chapter by the United States in any district court of the United States, the Attorney General may file with the clerk of such court a certificate stating that in his opinion the case is of general public importance. A copy of that certificate shall be furnished immediately by such clerk to the chief judge or in his absence to the presiding district judge of the district in which such action is pending. Upon receipt of such copy, such judge shall designate immediately a judge of that district to hear and determine action.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35
cases, 1986–2017 · leading case: United States v. Robert E. Brennan
United States v. Robert E. Brennan (2003)
“18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(B)®. The actual transfer of the bearer bonds to Bond on June 5/10 was not itself a financial transaction to conceal or disguise the ownership or control of the proceeds of an unlawful activity.”
United States v. Arthur C. Bieganowski, M.D., Richard J. Goldberg, C.P.A., Gustavo Diaz, and Jesse Jaime Lopez (2002)
“§§ 1341 and 371, and conspiracy to money launder in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(B)®, (a)(2)(B)®, and (h).”
United States v. Garcia (2009)
“” 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(B)i). 4 Interpreting the analogous transportation provision of the money laundering statute, which prohibits the transportation of certain criminal proceeds into or out of the United States “knowing that such transportation .”
United States v. Alan Louis Bashara (1994)
“18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(A)©. On February 11,1993, five days before his trial was to begin, Bashara pleaded guilty to both counts.”
United States v. Frank Smith, Keith McCain Russell Ellis, Eric Wilson, Sherman Moore, Steven Pink and Charles Poteete (2000)
“§ 1956 Wilson’s arguments challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions under the CCE statute, § 848, and under the minors statute, § 861, also founder on the same grounds as the same points did with Moore. Wilson also claims that the evidence was…”
United States v. Dennis (2001)
“§ 152 , twenty-nine counts of illegal transfer of funds (money laundering) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(B)®, two counts of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Carpenter (2016)
“” 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (c)(4). “Specified unlawful activity” includes mail fraud in violation of 18 U.”
Rice v. Janovich (1987)
“§ 1965 provides federal courts with extended venue and subpoena powers; and 18 U.S.C. § 1966 authorizes the United States Attorney General and his des-ignees to recommend expedited treatment of RICO lawsuits *54 filed in federal court.”
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Mario R. Garcia-Emanuel, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appel (1994)
“All told, the government charged that seventeen of the transactions constituted money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(B)© (1988). 2 *1473 The district court granted a judgment of acquittal with respect to all the money laundering counts based on the discussion of money…”
United States v. Randy Glenn Young (2001)
“This difference is important because when grouping is accomplished pursuant to U.”
United States v. Roberts (2001)
“§ 841 ; and one count of money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1966 . After conducting sentencing hearings, during which the district court made findings regarding the quantities of cocaine and cocaine base attributable to each defendant, the court sentenced Roberts to…”
United States v. Joseph W. Rose, United States of America v. Michael Allen Peterson (1994)
“in keeping with the definition of money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1966 (a)(1)(A)(i). Both Rose and Peterson objected to this aspect of the sentencing report.”
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.