18 U.S.C. § 551
Concealing or destroying invoices or other papers
Whoever willfully conceals or destroys any invoice, book, or paper relating to any merchandise imported into the United States, after an inspection thereof has been demanded by the collector of any collection district; or
Whoever conceals or destroys at any time any such invoice, book, or paper for the purpose of suppressing any evidence of fraud therein contained—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1931–2024 · leading case: Bollenbach v. United States
Bollenbach v. United States (1946)
“1152 , 18 U.S.C. § 551 .) We are therefore thrown back upon an appraisal of what the Circuit Court of Appeals deemed a mistaken charge in the proper setting of this case.”
United States v. Larry Brock (2024)
“44–45 (citing 18 U.S.C. § 551 (prohibiting both concealing or destroying documents relating to imported merchandise and concealing or destroying such documents “for the purpose of suppressing any evidence of fraud therein”); id.”
Platek v. Aderhold (1934)
“The petition exhibits a regular record of conviction for possessing bonds stolen from the mail, and it claims that the offense was that of an accessory after the fact, punishable under 18 USCA § 551 by imprisonment not to exceed one-half the maximum term prescribed for a…”
United States v. Johnson (1941)
“It does not cite the "accessory after the fact" statute, 18 U.S.C.A. § 551 . The indictment uses substantially the phraseology of said statute and specifies the crime to be, inter alia, a "felonious" aiding and abetting, which it could not be if the charge were one of accessory…”
United States v. John E. Murray, Jr. (1980)
“§ 542 , and (3) to knowingly and willfully conceal and destroy papers relating to said merchandise for the purpose of suppressing evidence of fraud against the United States Customs Service, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 551 . The count also alleges that in furtherance of this…”
Skelly v. United States (1935)
“Upon the commission of such acts by Berman and Skelly they would become accessories after the fact to the principals to such substantive offense, and upon conviction thereof liable to punishment as provided in 18 USCA § 551. The acts of a principal to a substantive offense and…”
United States v. Tamas (1955)
““Upon the commission of such acts by Berman and Skelly they would become accessories after the fact to the principals to such substantive offense, and upon conviction thereof liable to punishment as provided in 18 USCA § 551.” The board of review in its decision concluded that…”
Laska v. United States (1936)
“Proof of a common understanding may be and nearly always is adduced from circumstances.”
United States v. Varelli (1969)
“1152 , 18 U.S.C. § 551 .)” Bollenbach v. United States, 326 U.”
United States v. Chapman (1931)
“18 USCA § 551. The second count charged the same crime by Jackson, alleging it to be a felony committed by Jackson, and knowledge thereof by defendant, and a concealment of Jackson by defendant and that defendant failed for, to wit, five months after such knowledge to disclose…”
United States v. Jac Natori Co. (1993)
“On its part, the defendant denies that the statute of limitations bars an action against it for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 551 11 and maintains that “on at least three separate occasions government officers responsible for the investigation and prosecution of this case have…”
United States v. Venturini (1931)
“18 USCA § 551. The seeond count charged the same crime by Jackson, alleging it to be a felony committed by Jackson, and knowledge thereof by defendant, andi a concealment of Jackson by defendant, and that defendant failed for, to wit, five months after such knowledge to disclose…”
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.