Robert Lynn Martin and Maurice Daniel Dodson v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that when the statute was \neither patently nor latently ambiguous ... there is no need to resort to in pari materia constructions\
• 18 U.S.C. § 1084 , which prohibits transmission of wagering information in interstate commerce, does not violate First Amendment
• 18 U.S.C. 11084, which prohibits trrn~smissionof wagering information in interstatecommerce, does not.violate First Amendment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).