Second Circuit· 7/6/1999

United States v. Guadagna

Citations

183 F.3d 122

How courts have described this case

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

holding that direct proof of the defendant’s fraudulent intent is not necessary for wire fraud conviction and that circumstantial evidence may suffice
holding that sufficiency test must be applied “to the totality of the government’s case and not to each element, as each fact may gain color from others”
holding that sufficiency test must be applied “to the totality of the government’s case and not to each element, as each fact may gain color from others”
holding that sufficiency test must be applied “to the totality of the government’s case and not to each element, as each fact may gain color from others”
holding that sufficiency test “must be applied to the totality of the government’s case and not to each element, as each fact may gain color from others”
holding that sufficiency test must be applied “to the totality of the government’s case and not to each element, as each fact may gain color from others”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Feinberg, Parker, Pooler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

113 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.