18 U.S.C. § 1967
Evidence
In any proceeding ancillary to or in any civil action instituted by the United States under this chapter the proceedings may be open or closed to the public at the discretion of the court after consideration of the rights of affected persons.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1986–2020 · leading case: United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius
United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius (2017)
“§ 1956 (a)(2)(B)(i) (Sixth Claim); engaging in or attempting to engage in monetary transactions affecting interstate or foreign commerce' with more than $10,000 in proceeds of a specified unlawful activity under 18 U.S.C. § 1967 (Seventh Claim); and conspiracy to engage in money…”
United States v. Thomas Alfred Flanagan (1994)
“§ 1343 , and one count of money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1967 (a). The district *951 court calculated Mr.”
Karel v. Kroner (1986)
“§ 1966 authorizes the United States Attorney General and his designees to recommend expedited treatment of RICO lawsuits filed in federal court; 18 U.S.C. § 1967 authorizes closed proceedings when brought by the United States; and 18 U.”
United States v. L. Brian Whitfield (2016)
“§ 7206 (1)); and four counts of money laundering ( 18 U.S.C. § 1967 ). The district court sentenced him to 240 months in federal prison, a sentence well below the presentence report recommendation of 1,584 months, Whitfield appealed.”
Intel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (1987)
“§ 1966 , (which gives the Attorney General or his designee the right to recommend expedited treatment of RICO lawsuits), 18 U.S.C. § 1967 , (which authorizes closed RICO proceedings when brought by the United States), and 18 U.”
United States v. Reginald Greene, Reginald Greene (2000)
“§ 1344 (Counts Three through Seventeen); money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1967 (Counts Eighteen through Thirty-One); and forfeiture.”
United States v. Donald Pennington (1999)
“Pennington and Oldner argue the evidence was insufficient to convict them of *1066 money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1967 , which requires proof they knowingly engaged in a financial transaction involving the proceeds of a criminal offense.”
Scotto v. Munn (2020)
“§ 1334 , 18 U.S.C. § 1967 , 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 , 28 U.”
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.