Fifth Circuit· 8/9/2007
United States v. Wright
Citations
- 496 F.3d 371
- 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 18988
- 2007 WL 2265622
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 defendant’s flight out of a back door when officers arrived to arrest him did not warrant an enhancement because he was never taken into custody
- upholding enhancement where defendant used fraudulent cashier’s checks to help borrowers falsely appear creditworthy
- in which defendant purchased cashier’s checks in borrowers’ names to defraud mortgage companies into thinking borrowers had provided funds
- cashier’s checks and a separate bank account that made it more difficult for the Government to detect tax evasion
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Higginbotham, Davis, Wiener
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- United States v. OllisonFifth Circuit· 2009-01-06· cited 205×
- United States v. Gonzalez-TerrazasFifth Circuit· 2008-05-22· cited 77×
- United States v. CrawleyFifth Circuit· 2008-06-27· cited 73×
- United States v. Anthony ValdezFifth Circuit· 2013-08-12· cited 69×
- Carachuri-Rosendo v. HolderFifth Circuit· 2009-06-02· cited 56×
- United States v. JonesTenth Circuit· 2008-07-08· cited 43×
- United States v. ParolineE.D. Texas· 2009-12-07· cited 32×
- United States v. Jaca-NazarioFirst Circuit· 2008-03-27· cited 23×
- United States v. FuchsSeventh Circuit· 2011-03-17· cited 19×
- United States v. Keith KennedyFifth Circuit· 2013-02-07· cited 12×
- United States v. LandwerSeventh Circuit· 2011-04-28· cited 11×
- United States v. Robert MasonFifth Circuit· 2013-07-02· cited 11×
- United States v. DonaghyE.D. New York· 2008-07-23· cited 8×
- United States v. Mendoza-GomezFifth Circuit· 2023-06-01· cited 8×
- United States v. Gonzalez-TerrazasFifth Circuit· 2008-02-01· cited 4×
- United States v. WoodardFourth Circuit· 2012-09-21· cited 1×
- United States v. Gonzalez-TerrazasFifth Circuit· 2008-02-04
- United States v. Keith KennedyFifth Circuit· 2013-02-08
- United States v. Edward SeptonEighth Circuit· 2009-03-12
- United States v. MsiakiiFifth Circuit· 2014-07-17
Cites
23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Stansbury v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1994-04-26· cited 2,603×
- United States v. CothranFifth Circuit· 2002-08-08· cited 185×
- United States v. Andrew StroudSecond Circuit· 1990-01-08· cited 148×
- United States v. HuertaFifth Circuit· 1999-07-27· cited 146×
- United States v. Frasiel HugheyFifth Circuit· 1998-07-21· cited 137×
- United States v. John M. ClementsFifth Circuit· 1996-01-22· cited 126×
- United States v. James Anderson and Dean HodgeFifth Circuit· 1999-04-26· cited 121×
- United States v. Billie Mac Jobe, Stephen Taylor, Philip Mark Sutton, Stanley Pruet Jobe, and Fernando NovoaFifth Circuit· 1996-12-05· cited 108×
- United States v. Michael Crandale WilliamsFourth Circuit· 1998-07-30· cited 106×
- United States v. Larry Terrell McDonaldSixth Circuit· 1999-01-21· cited 65×
- United States v. GreenFifth Circuit· 2003-03-11· cited 62×
- United States v. Frederick R. Draves, Cross-AppelleeSeventh Circuit· 1997-02-28· cited 62×
- United States v. InmanFifth Circuit· 2005-06-07· cited 61×
- United States v. PowellFifth Circuit· 1997-09-24· cited 56×
- United States v. BennettFirst Circuit· 1994-09-20· cited 52×
- United States v. K. Douglas JollySecond Circuit· 1996-12-05· cited 49×
- United States v. Donald Ray CockerhamFifth Circuit· 1990-12-04· cited 46×
- United States v. Ignacio Farfan-CarreonFifth Circuit· 1991-06-27· cited 42×
- United States v. BurkeFifth Circuit· 2005-12-02· cited 36×
- United States v. Gonzalez-AlvarezFirst Circuit· 2002-01-17· cited 30×
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.