Legal Opinion

United States v. Oaks

District Court, D. Maryland

Decided March 20, 2018No. Criminal No. RDB–17–0288PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Additional considerations cement the instant allegations within the range of conduct proscribed by federal law after McDonnell . Drafting legislation lies at the very heart of a legislator's official purpose. A draft bill is therefore distinct from other conduct based merely on a legislator's privileged access or administrative perqs, which alone do not make conduct "official" under 18 U.S.C. § 201(a)(3). See McDonnell , 136 S.Ct. at 2368 ; United States v. Silver , 864 F.3d 102, 120 (2d Cir. 2017) (use of official letterhead insufficient under McDonnell ); Valdes, 475 F.3d at 1329-30. This…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  2. Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. United States v. BirdsallSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  4. United States v. SilverCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
  5. Kable v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1973

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lamone v. LewinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API