United States v. Billy Tongo

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to read a materiality requirement into 18 U.S.C. § 1015(a) but apparently holding that there was sufficient evidence of materiality to sustain a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a)
• “A plain reading of [§ 1015(a) ] ... similarly leaves no room for error.... There is no reference in the statutory text to materiality.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).