United States v. Daniel M. Paradies, the Paradies Shops, Inc., Paradies Midfield Corporation, Ira Jackson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court correctly refused a requested instruction that contained the defendants’ “partisan” argument and proposed factual findings
• holding that the district court correctly refused a requested instruction that contained the defendants’ “partisan” argument and proposed factual findings
• recognizing that a “connection to federal funds” is not required for a conviction under § 666
• holding that failure to give an instruction “is reversible error if (1) the requested instruction was a correct statement of the law, (2) its subject matter was not substantially covered by other instructions, and (3
• explaining that the district court does not have to give a requested jury instruction that is “partisan and that ... aspired to place the ... defendants’ desired factual findings into the mouth of the court”
• concluding district court did not err in finding tax evader’s transfer of funds through shell corporations in an attempt to conceal his transactions warranted sophisticated means enhancement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).