Legal Opinion
United States v. Leahy
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided February 15, 2006No. 03-4490, 03-4184, 03-4542, 03-4560, 04-2912PublishedCited by 76 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FUENTES, Circuit Judge.
We ordered rehearing en banc in three separate appeals to determine whether the *330District Courts’ orders of restitution and forfeiture violated defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury.
I.Background
In United States v. Paul J. Leahy, 2006 WL 335806, following trial, a jury found defendant Dantone, Inc. (“Dantone”), and its two senior managers, defendants Paul Leahy and Timothy Smith, guilty of engaging in, and aiding and abetting, bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344.1 Defendants’ convictions stemmed from their defrauding various banks out of profits…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- United States v. Lionel Reifler, Glenn B. Laken, John M. Black, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- United States v. Paul J. Leahy United States of America v. Timothy Smith United States of America v. Dantone, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
- United States v. John Vitillo, Vitillo Corporation and Vitillo Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- United States v. FumoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- United States v. MilkiewiczCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2006
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.