Legal Opinion

United States v. Arnold L. Hollingsworth, Jr. And William A. Pickard, III

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided June 2, 1994No. 92-2399, 92-2483, 92-2694 and 92-2695PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POSNER, Chief Judge.

The defendants, Pickard (a dentist) and Hollingsworth (a farmer), were convicted by a jury of money laundering and related offenses in violation of federal law, and were sentenced to 24 and 18 months in prison, respectively. A panel of this court held that the defendants had been entrapped as a matter of law, and were entitled to be acquitted. 9 F.3d 593 (7th Cir.1993). Rehearing en banc was granted on the petition of the government, which contended that the decision had created a new element of the defense of entrapment — “readiness”—and by doing so had radically altered…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. United States v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Sherman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  3. Ratzlaf v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Standefer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Jacobson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. Beckwith v. City of Daytona Beach ShoresCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1995
  2. United States v. SquillacoteCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2000
  3. United States v. Dwayne A. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
  4. United States v. WiseCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
  5. United States v. Abdul Majid Bala, Also Known as Sealed 2, Kantilal Patel, Also Known as Sealed 1Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000

86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API