18 U.S.C. § 3512
Foreign requests for assistance in criminal investigations and prosecutions
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, referred to in subsecs. (a)(2)(A) and (h)(1), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2011–2026 · leading case: United States v. Trustees of Boston College
United States v. Trustees of Boston College (2011)
“” The subpoenae were issued by a commissioner pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3512 , the United Kingdom Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (“UK-MLAT”), 2 and a sealed Order of this Court.”
United States v. Moloney (2012)
“The subpoenas were issued to Boston College (“BC”) by a commissioner appointed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3512 and the “US-UK MLAT,” the mutual legal assistance treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom.”
United States v. Trustees of Boston College (2013)
“In March 31, 2011, as provided in the US-UK MLAT and 18 U.S.C. § 3512 , 2 the district court appointed *18 a commissioner to pursue the UK’s request.”
Fed. Republic of Nigeria v. VR Advisory Servs., Ltd. (2022)
“The new statute made explicit what courts had long held was authorized under § 1782 – for example, that a federal judge may order “the appearance of a person for the purpose of providing testimony or a statement, or requiring the production of documents or other things,” 18…”
United States v. McLellan (2020)
“government issued two subpoenas through an appointed commissioner, see 18 U.S.C. § 3512 , to compel Boston College ("BC") to produce interviews from formerly active participants in the conflict that were compiled by one of BC's research projects.”
United States v. C.R. (2011)
“…the two defendants sent to prison for sexually abusing and harassing her and from a defendant such as C.R. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 3512 (b) (restitution and fines); § 3633 (order of restitution); § 3663A (mandatory restitution); § 3663 (procedure for restitution); § 3664 (rules…”
Zavadovsky v. Republic of Austria (2026)
“§ 1782 and 18 U.S.C. § 3512 ,” “us[ed] an incorrect Austrian reference number,” and “sen[t] both Plaintiffs’ letters and criminal subpoenas in a single FedEx envelope.”
In Re: Request from the United v. (2013)
“104-2 ("US-UK MLAT")1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3512 , a commissioner 1 Article 5 of the US-UK MLAT states: 1.”
the University of Texas System and the University of Texas at Dallas v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas And Marily (2015)
“11 Statutes 18 U.S.C. § 3512 ........................”
Application of the United States of America for an Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(d) (2018)
“Over a month later, on November 29, 2017, the l\/lagistrate Judge denied the amended application on the ground that the government’s argument, if accepted, would subject to § 2703(d) “every entity which now offers free WiFi,” a conclusion ' The government sought this order,…”
Application of Jason Leopold and Buzzfeed, Inc. for Access to Certain Sealed Court Records (2020)
“§3123 ; and for records, at the request of foreign governments, under Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (“MLATs”), 18 U.S.C. § 3512 . On a retrospective basis, the Court “provided an unprecedented level of transparency into the process of judicial review of the [U.”
Republic of Turkey (2021)
“18 U.S.C. § 3512 (a)(1). The respondents contend that the petitioner's bypass of the MLAT process is evidence of the improper purpose of its application.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 3512(a)(1) — 1 case
United States v. Trustees of Boston College (2013)
“In March 31, 2011, as provided in the US-UK MLAT and 18 U.S.C. § 3512 , 2 the district court appointed *18 a commissioner to pursue the UK’s request.”
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.