Notes of Decisions
United States v. Shaun Chapman, 866 F.3d 129 (3d Cir. 2017).
· cites it 18× “Chapman contends that his convictions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c) do not qualify as crimes of violence.”
United States v. Havelock, 664 F.3d 1284 (9th Cir. 2012).
· cites it 23× “We start with the problem presented by this case: the meaning of “person” and of “addressed to” in 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c) (“§ 876(c)”), which prohibits the mailing of communications “addressed to any other person and containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to…”
United States v. Deborah Mae Carlson, 787 F.3d 939 (8th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 43× “Deborah Mae Carlson was convicted after a jury trial of nine counts of mailing threatening communications and three counts of mailing extortionate communications under various provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 876 . On appeal, Carlson challenges her convictions for the three counts of…”
United States v. Bly, 510 F.3d 453 (4th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 10× “Bly appeals from the district court's refusal to dismiss the portion of an indictment charging him with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 (b) (the "§ 876(b) Offense").”
United States v. Williams, 376 F.3d 1048 (10th Cir. 2004).
· cites it 10× “Williams' was convicted after a jury trial on seven counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 . Williams was tried in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.”
United States v. Holland, 519 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 3× “I Russell Laroy Holland pled guilty to one count each under 18 U.S.C. § 876 and 18 U.S.C. § 871 for mailing threatening communications and threatening the President of the United States.”
United States v. Jacob De La Fuente, 353 F.3d 766 (9th Cir. 2003).
· cites it 6× “Jacob De La Fuente pled guilty to two counts of mailing threats to injure in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c). Pursuant to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA), 18 U.”
United States v. Rosemary Zavrel, 384 F.3d 130 (3d Cir. 2004).
· cites it 11× “to injure the person of the addressee” under 18 U.S.C. § 876 . For the reasons that follow, we hold that it does, and we therefore affirm the judgment of conviction.”
United States v. Theron Johnny Maxton, 940 F.2d 103 (4th Cir. 1991).
· cites it 10× “*104 OPINION DONALD RUSSELL, Circuit Judge: On August 8, 1989, Defendant Theron Johnny Maxton, an inmate in the South Carolina state correctional system, was convicted in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina of violating 18 U.S.C. § 876 by sending…”
United States v. Williams, 641 F.3d 758 (6th Cir. 2011).
· cites it 6× “Williams proceeded pro se at trial, and a jury convicted him of mailing a threatening communication to a federal judge in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c). The district court proceeded to sentence Williams without first obtaining a presentence report and conducted the hearing by…”
United States v. Mabie, 663 F.3d 322 (8th Cir. 2011).
· cites it 6× “A jury found William Mabie guilty of three counts of mailing threatening communications, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c), and one count of interstate communication of a threat, in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Havelock, 619 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. 2010).
· cites it 18× “OPINION CANBY, Circuit Judge: Kurt William Havelock appeals his jury conviction of six counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876 (c), which makes it a felony to mail a communication "addressed to any other person and containing .”
18 U.S.C. § 876(c): 2 cases
18 U.S.C. § 876(d): 1 case
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.