18 U.S.C. § 837
Repealed. Pub. L. 91–452, title XI, § 1106(b)(1), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 960]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1971–2023 · leading case: United States v. Joseph Alfred Tanner
United States v. Joseph Alfred Tanner (1972)
“This appeal challenges appellants’ convictions for substantive offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 837 , 1363, 2275 and for conspiracy under 18 U.”
State v. Douglas C. (2022)
“The court stated this only after noting the broad language of the statute at issue: ‘‘The prohibited conduct is described in 18 U.S.C. § 837 [1964] as the act of transporting explosives in interstate com- merce for the purpose of destroying any building or other real or personal…”
United States v. Marshall Zeidman and J. O. M. Account Services International, Inc. (1976)
“There Count III of the indictment charged interstate transportation of explosives over a 3-year period in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 837 . The Government’s bill of particulars under Count III listed a number of separate interstate trips on different dates by different defendants.”
State v. McKeel (1984)
“At the time, a comma separated "threat" from the phrase "or false information," and the bill was virtually identical to an analogous federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 837 (d) [1] . This comma was deleted by Senate Amendment before ultimate passage of the bill into law.”
United States v. Orlando Bosch Avila, A/K/A Ernesto (1971)
“Counts III, IV, and V charged only Bosch with conveying threats by telegram to damage the ships and planes of Mexico, Spain and England in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 837 (d) (1966), which precludes conveying threats by telegram to damage real and personal property.”
United States v. John Wayne Baranski (1973)
“§ 1363 , and the conspiracy count charged a conspiracy to commit actions in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 837 , 1363, 1364, 1952, 2275, 81, and 1992.”
United States v. Abrams (1982)
“2d 220 (1972) ( 18 U.S.C. § 837 — transportation of explosives), both cited by defendant Pierce in support of his argument for duplicity here.”
United States v. Frederick G. Norton (1987)
“18 U.S.C. § 837 (b) (repealed 1970) (emphasis added).”
United States v. Weinberg (1971)
“§ 231 (a) (2) (interstate transportation of explosives or firearms), 18 U.S.C. § 837 (interstate transportation of explosives), 26 U.”
United States v. Bloss (1981)
“, 18 U.S.C. § 837 , it is inconceivable that any commander outside the convening authority’s direct chain of command would even attempt to place enough pressure on one of our convening authorities to cause him to face the possible consequences of violating this Article’s…”
State v. Douglas C. (2023)
“The court stated this only after noting the broad language of the statute at issue: ‘‘The prohibited conduct is described in 18 U.S.C. § 837 [1964] as the act of transporting explosives in interstate com- merce for the purpose of destroying any building or other real or personal…”
Sims, Delivence Andre (2015)
“…interest the aatcan be enforced under Civil Rights Act of 1960.See Title 42 U.S,C.§§l£¥l,1974- (e),l975d;18 U.S.C.§§ 837,1074,1509;20 U.S.C.§§~24l,640;74 Stat.B€(l§SO);And ~`x the Civil Rights Act of l957,includes Title §§ 5.U.S. ~~ ***** --`y@ ".- , i.civii. ‘-…”
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.