Legal Opinion

Neder v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided June 10, 1999No. 97-1985PublishedCited by 4,414 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Rehnquist

Petitioner was tried on charges of violating a number of federal criminal statutes penalizing fraud. It is agreed that the District Court erred in refusing to submit the issue of materiality to the jury with respect to those charges involving tax fraud. See United States v. Gaudin, 515 U. S. 506 (1995). We hold that the harmless-error rule of Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18 (1967), applies to this error. We also hold that materiality is an element of the federal mail fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud statutes under which petitioner was also charged.

I

In the mid-1980’s, petitioner Ellis E.…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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

3Cited by4,414 opinions

  1. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Shinseki, Secretary of Veterans Affairs v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  3. Puckett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  4. People v. CarinesMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  5. United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

4,409 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