18 U.S.C. § 792
Harboring or concealing persons
Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under sections 793 or 794 of this title, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Shirley Kramer v. Tom Price, Judge, Cnty. Crim. Court No. 5, & Carl Thomas, Sheriff, Dallas Cnty., Texas, 712 F.2d 174 (5th Cir. 1983).
Shirley Kramer v. Tom Price, Judge, Cnty. Crim. Court No. 5, & Carl Thomas, Sheriff, Dallas Cnty., Texas, 712 F.2d 174 (5th Cir. 1983). “18 U.S.C. § 792 (1976). . 18 U.S.C. § 111 (1976).”
Knoedler v. Roxbury Twp., 485 F. Supp. 990 (D.N.J. 1980). “1979-1980) (sale of chemicals which release toxic vapors prohibited, if seller has reasonable cause to suspect they will be used for a specific purpose); 18 U.S.C. § 792 (crime to harbor or conceal any person, if reasonable grounds to believe or suspect he has committed certain…”
Florida Businessmen for Free Enter. v. State, 499 F. Supp. 346 (N.D. Fla. 1980). “”); 18 U.S.C. § 792 (outlaws harboring or concealing a person whom a defendant “knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed or is about to commit, an offense under section 793 or 794 .”
Sigler v. LeVan, 485 F. Supp. 185 (D. Maryland 1980). “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 792 et seq.; W. Prosser, Torts § 13, at 94 (4th ed.”
Yang v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 109 F.3d 1185 (7th Cir. 1997). “Any alien who at any time has been convicted (the judgment on such conviction becoming final) of, or has been so convicted of a conspiracy or attempt to violate— (i) any offense under chapter 37 [ 18 U.S.C. § 792 et seq.] (relating to espionage), chapter 105 [ 18 U.”
United States v. Del Percio, 657 F. Supp. 849 (W.D. Mich. 1987). “§ 794 ; harboring persons suspected of such acts, 18 U.S.C. § 792 ; committing fraud related to nationality, citizenship, and passports, 18 U.”
Virginia Hoge v. Eric Schmidt (C.D. Cal. 2024). “) Hoge asserts three causes of action against all Defendants citing federal and 15 California law: (1) “Cyber Spying” (citing 18 U.S.C. § 792 et seq.; Cal. Consumer Priv.”
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.