Legal Opinion

United States v. George William Blood (04-5101) and Stephen L. Crittenden (04-5261)

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided January 24, 2006No. 04-5101, 04-5261PublishedCited by 88 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOORE, Circuit Judge.

This case presents a question of first impression for this court: the meaning of the phrase “with intent to deceive another” found in 18 U.S.C. § 513(a), which prohibits possession of counterfeit and forged securities with this deceptive intent. The Defendants-Appellants George Blood and Stephen Crittenden appeal their convictions and sentences for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 513(a) on a number of grounds. Defendant Blood appeals his conviction based on insufficiency of the evidence, improper jury instructions, prosecutorial misconduct, judicial bias, and outrageous…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by88 opinions

  1. United States v. Roger D. BlackwellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
  2. Mirna Serrano v. Cintas CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  3. United States v. KuehneCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
  4. United States v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
  5. Radvansky v. City of Olmsted FallsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007

83 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