Legal Opinion
United States v. Electrodyne Systems Corp.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 12, 1998No. Criminal 96-127(AJL)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LECHNER, District Judge.
On 4 March 1996, a United States Grand Jury for the District of New Jersey (the “Grand Jury”) returned a thirteen count, thirty-eight page indictment (the “Indictment”) against Electrodyne Systems Corporation (“Electrodyne”), Dennis Nathan (“Nathan”) and Victor Aron Lander (“Lander”) (collectively, the “Defendants”). 1 The Indictment charges the Individual Defendants and Electrodyne with conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (“Section 371”), violations of the Arms Export Control Act (the “AECA”), 22 U.S.C. § 2778(b)(2)…
2Cases cited90 opinions
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Stinson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Burns v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- United States v. Kikumura, YuCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Braxton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Dennis Nathan, in No. 98-6262 United States of America v. Victor Aron Lander, in No. 98-6263 United States of America v. Electrodyne Systems Corporation, in No. 98-6299Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- United States v. NathanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- United States v. NathanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999