Legal Opinion
United States v. De Castro
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided April 30, 1997No. 95-4648PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON SUA SPONTE RECONSIDERATION
Before TJOFLAT and BLACK, Circuit Judges, and REAVLEY * , Senior Circuit Judge. REAVLEY, Senior Circuit Judge:
The prior panel opinion, reported at 104 F.3d 1289, is withdrawn, and the following opinion is substituted in its stead. Appellant Maria De Castro complains that the district court erred in failing to let the jury decide the element of materiality in her trial for making false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1010. In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Wells, 1 we conclude that materiality is not an element of this…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- United States v. Hooshang HooshmandCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- United States v. KramerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- United States v. VealCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- United States v. DupreCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
- United States v. George Condon, Samuel William BrawnerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- United States v. CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Branch D. KloessCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.