Legal Opinion
United States v. George Borden, United States of America v. Billy Smith, Sr.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided November 26, 1993No. 92-5826, 93-5271PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WILKINSON, Circuit Judge.
This consolidated appeal requires us to determine the applicable statute of limitations for charges under the Lacey Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3371, et seq., which prohibits the transportation, sale, or purchase of fish or wildlife obtained in violation of any state law or regulation. We hold that the federal “catchall” statute of limitations in 18 U.S.C. § 3282 applies to Lacey Act crimes and that a defendant can be charged under the Lacey Act even when the statute of limitations for the predicate state offense has run. In so holding, we affirm the judgments of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United States v. LicavoliCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
- United States v. Edward A. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Rudi Bernard SmithCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- United States v. Nicholas Panarella, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Roland Felix EyoumCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- United States v. RomanoDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1996
- United States v. KOCZUKCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- United States v. KoczukCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.