Legal Opinion
United States of America,plaintiff-Appellee v. Sho Jay Matsumaru
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 3, 2001No. 99-10334PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TROTT, Circuit Judge:
It’s been said that “good counsellors lack no clients.” William Shakespeare, Measure for Measure act I, sc.2. Sho Jay Matsumaru certainly did not lack clients, but according to the government, it was not because he was a “good counsellor.” To the contrary, the government characterizes Matsumaru as a cunning, sophisticated lawyer engaged in a complex, multi-layered criminal scheme designed to defraud his clients and the United States government.
The prosecution pieced together the acts of Matsumaru’s tragic play during a week-long trial, featuring over twenty-five…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Thomas Jefferson University v. ShalalaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. ReeseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- United States v. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- United States v. GallantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. Oscar Acosta DelgadoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- D-RBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2011
- United States v. Michael Emmett BeckCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. William Douglas LomowCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.