Legal Opinion

United States v. Kevin M. Coyle, A/K/A David Winchester

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided September 12, 1991No. 90-5686PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge:

This appeal raises the question whether Kevin M. Coyle violated the mail fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, by using the mail to sell and distribute descramblers, intending to assist his customers to intercept and receive television programs without authorization from cable companies. We conclude that Coyle violated the statute and affirm his conviction.

I

From January 1988 to September 1989, Coyle, trading as AMCOM, built and sold cable television converters, often called de-scramblers. The descramblers enable cable television customers to receive additional…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Pereira v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. McNally v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Durland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  4. Hammerschmidt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  5. Parr v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. United States v. Tony Jerome MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
  2. United States v. Daniel I. Colton, United States of America v. Daniel I. ColtonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2000
  3. United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  4. United States v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995
  5. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN & EFIRD MILLS, INC., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1992

11 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