United States v. John M. Clements

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s use of multiple cashiers checks and his wife’s separate bank account to “obscure the link” between the money and himself constituted sophisticated means
• holding alleged error in exclusion of testimony was not properly preserved because\`the substance of the evidence was [not] made known to the court by offer'\ and was not \`apparent from the context within which questions were asked'\
• depositing checks into wife’s bank account to “obscure the link between the money and . . . [the defendant]” involved sophisticated means
• affirming enhancement where defendant used cashier’s checks and a separate bank account that made it more difficult for the Government to detect tax evasion
• declining to consider the admissibility of letters because the appellant had not offered them into evidence
• upholding the enhancement when a defendant moved funds from his account to an account in his wife’s name

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).