United States v. Mann
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
161 F.3d 840 (1998)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
James Mann and William Moore (defendants) were convicted of various crimes regarding their dealings with Jefferson Savings and Loan Association, McAllen, Texas, and its successors (Jefferson). Count 1 and related counts alleged that Mann, Moore, and others violated 18 U.S.C. § 371 by conspiring to (1) defraud the United States by frustrating Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) oversight of Jefferson, (2) violate 18 U.S.C. § 657 by misapplying bank funds, (3) violate 18 U.S.C. § 1006 by making false entries in bank records, (4) defraud the United States by impeding the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and (5) violate 26 U.S.C. § 7206 by filing false income tax returns. Mann and Moore appealed their convictions, arguing, among other things, that count 1 was barred by the statute of limitations. Specifically, Moore argued that (1) his count 1 conviction must be reversed if any of the conspiracy’s five alleged objectives was barred by the statute of limitations and (2) the United States did not prove that he performed any act in furtherance of the conspiracy’s alleged objective during the limitations period. Additionally, Mann and Moore argued that the United States at most proved that they committed overt acts to conceal an already completed conspiracy. Finally, Mann argued that he withdrew from the conspiracy.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Reavley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.