Legal Opinion

M.H. v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 19, 2011No. 11-55712PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TALLMAN, Circuit Judge:

Appellant M.H. is the target of a grand jury investigation seeking to determine whether he used secret Swiss bank accounts to evade paying federal taxes. The district court granted a motion to compel M.H.’s compliance with a grand jury subpoena duces tecum demanding that he produce certain records related to his foreign bank accounts. The court declined to condition its order compelling production upon a grant of limited immunity and, pursuant to the recalcitrant witness statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1826, held M.H. in contempt for refusing to comply. M.H. appealed.

The…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Marchetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Shapiro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Wilson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Baltimore City Department of Social Services v. BouknightSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. H. Thomas FehnCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. In re Various Grand Jury SubpoenasDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
  2. United States v. DoeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
  3. State v. ReederCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  4. In Re GRAND JURY SUBPOENACourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
  5. In Re GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS, NO. 4-10Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2013

17 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