United States v. Barry L. Knipp (91-5312), and Vernon L. Hamilton (91-5452)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding evidence sufficient to support the conviction of a bank officer where the jury could conclude that he facilitated the check kiting scheme of a customer
• holding evidence sufficient to support the conviction of a bank officer where the jury could conclude that he facilitated the check kiting scheme of a customer
• upholding defendants’ convictions and applying the ten-year statute of limitations pursuant to § 3293 for “one count of conspiracy (a) to defraud a federally insured financial institution and (b

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).