United States v. Ioanis v. Paneras

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a “pattern of deceit in the defendant’s business activities” is evidence of fraud
• holding that a criminally fraudulent scheme must be “reasonably , calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and comprehension”
• overwhelming evi- dence of guilt was “a factor which militates against” finding that a new trial was needed after jury saw arguably prejudi- cial information
• finding an intent to defraud when misrepresentations were contemporaneous with benefits received by defendant
• finding an intent to defraud when misrepresentations were contemporaneous with benefits received by defendant
• “Each case turns on its own facts, and on ‘the degree and pervasiveness of the prejudicial influence possibly resulting.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).