D.C. Circuit· 2/22/1977

United States v. John D. Ehrlichman

Citations

546 F.2d 910
178 U.S. App. D.C. 144

How courts have described this case

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

“[A]cting ‘willfully’ mean[s] acting with ‘a purpose to deprive a person of a specific constitutional right.’… One who does act with such specific intent is aware that what he does is precisely that which the statute forbids.”
“no logical inconsistency in the jury’s acceptance of defenses presented by” all defendants; other defendants did not allege Ehrlichman approved of surreptitious entry
mental state required by section 241 evidently not ambiguous. To be sure, section 241 includes a broad array of conspiracies within its ambit, but the rule of “[l]enity offers no proper refuge from [a] straightforward (even though 9 capacious

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Leyenthal, Leventhal, Wilkey, Merhige, Eastern, Virginia

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

73 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.