D.C. Circuit· 6/29/2010

United States v. Coughlin

Citations

610 F.3d 89
391 U.S. App. D.C. 278
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 13228
2010 WL 2572946

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).

Judges: Tatel, Garland, Kavanaugh

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Other cases named United States v. Coughlin

13 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.