Legal Opinion

United States v. William Farrell

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided September 24, 1997No. 96-1860PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

STAPLETON, Circuit Judge:

This case requires us to interpret the phrase “corruptly persuades” in the federal witness tampering statute. That statute *486makes it a crime to attempt to “corruptly persuade” someone in order to “hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(3). William Farrell was convicted under the statute for attempting to dissuade a coconspirator from providing information to investigators of the…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Ratzlaf v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Chiarella v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Hughey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. McCormick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. United States v. Emanuel JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Arthur Andersen LLP v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  2. United States v. Lynn Michael LaVictorCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  3. United States v. Vincent R. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  4. United States v. GordonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
  5. United States v. David Wayne HullCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006

38 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