United States v. Paul Bruce Carpenter

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 “explicitness requirement” of McCormick does not require an official to “specifically state[] that he will exchange official action for a contribution”
• holding that \acts and statements in furtherance of the conspir- acy may be attributed to\ a co-conspirator and citing Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 646-47 (1946)
• holding that\acts and state- ments in furtherance of the conspiracy may be attributed to\ a co- conspirator and citing Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 646- 47 (1946)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).