Legal Opinion
United States v. LaFrance
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided November 6, 1989No. Crim. 89-213-HPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HARRINGTON, District Judge.
The defendants move to dismiss the indictment on the ground that Title 31, United States Code, Section 5324(3) is unconstitutional as being void-for-vagueness. 31 U.S.C. § 5324(3) sets forth, in pertinent part:
No person shall for the purpose of evading the reporting requirements of section 5313(a) with respect to such transaction—(3) structure or assist in structuring, or attempt to structure or assist in structuring, any transaction with one or more domestic financial institutions.
This Court rejects the defendants’ void-for-vagueness arguments…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. RainesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United States v. St. Michael's Credit Union and Janice SacharczykCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Stanley P. GimbelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- United States v. ScanioDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1988
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. MarounDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1990