holding that "section 1001 prosecutions are not limited to statements which are required to be made by law or regulation"
Summary of this case from U.S. v. KingstonNo. 80-2092.
March 22, 1982, OCTOBER TERM, 1981.
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 645 F. 2d 1195.
holding that "section 1001 prosecutions are not limited to statements which are required to be made by law or regulation"
Summary of this case from U.S. v. Kingstonholding that pharmacist had no reasonable expectation of privacy in items subject to administrative inspection under the Food, Drug, Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq.
Summary of this case from United States v. Acklenholding Florida's statutory ban on primary endorsements by political parties unconstitutional
Summary of this case from Gill v. State of Rhode Islandholding former s 103.091, F.S. 1978, an unconstitutional abridgement of the associational rights of the Dade County Democratic Party since it prohibited such a committee from endorsing or opposing any candidate of its political party who sought nomination in any primary election
Summary of this case from AGOfinding no rational basis upon which jury could approximate lost profits in antitrust suit
Summary of this case from Auwood v. Harry Brandt Booking OfficeFull title:SCM CORP. v. XEROX CORP
Court:U.S.
Date published: Mar 22, 1982
We have held, however, that the elements of § 1001 are as follows: (1) the defendant made a statement; (2)…
United States v. Gel Spice Co.Because the defendants were not in custody, Miranda warnings were not required. See United States v.…