United States v. Porter

994 F.2d 470 (1993)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Porter

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
994 F.2d 470 (1993)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

Porter (defendant) operated investment clubs. Porter pleaded guilty to falsifying newsletters sent to investors and agreed to testify before a grand jury. In response to questioning, Porter testified that to keep investors advised, he sent out a monthly newsletter that detailed the trades and the amount of money that had been made together with a dividend check, and that he was responsible for preparing the newsletter. After sentencing, Porter filed a habeas corpus petition to vacate his sentence. At the evidentiary hearing, Porter testified that it was not correct that he pled guilty because he was guilty; he was not aware that he mailed out newsletters; he had not admitted that the newsletters he mailed to investors were misrepresentations; he did not mail them; he did not know who mailed them on his behalf; and he did not know who generated them. The district court denied Porter’s petition. Porter was indicted for making irreconcilably contradictory statements in his grand jury and habeas hearing testimonies in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623(c). At trial, Porter testified that he was responsible for falsifying the newsletters and sending them out but denied that he had mailed them. A former employee testified that Porter provided the information for the newsletters but other employees, at Porters’ request, typed them, duplicated them, placed them in envelopes, and took them to the post office. Porter’s motion for a judgment of acquittal was denied. Porter was convicted and appealed on the ground that the evidence at trial was insufficient to show irreconcilable inconsistency between his declarations.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kyle, J.)

Concurrence (Gibson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership