United States v. Coughlin

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “this court can affirm a correct decision even if on different grounds than those assigned in the decision on review” (citation omitted)
• “The law is clear that innocent mailings — ones that contain no false information — may supply the mailing element.”
• “[The jury’s] acquittals on mail fraud counts relating to dates before May 13 did not necessarily mean that Coughlin had made no false economic submissions before that date.”
• “[A]s the Supreme Court has repeatedly held, the government is entitled to prove criminal acts in the disjunctive, notwithstanding that the indictment charges them in the conjunctive.” (citing Griffin v. United States, 502 U.S. 46, 56–60 (1991
• “The question is what the jury ‘necessarily’ decided.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).