More from Merriam-Webster on schmuck See words that rhyme with schmuck Thesaurus: They returned over a year later with a decision reversing the conviction and remanding the case to district court for a new trial. In fact, the scalable nature of BNE Power Farms can allow of expansion and the sale of the excess power to cities and the government with Power Purchase Agreements.
While the Supreme Court has not had to revisit the scope of mail fraud, lower courts have used Schmuck to guide them on the question. In two cases heard by the Fifth Circuit , a distinction sufficient enough to not be covered by the law was found.
In a later case, Carter v. United States , the Supreme Court relied on Schmuck when it applied the elements test in considering a lesser-included charge; other courts have cited the case to support similar applications.
In a case the Ninth Circuit was faced with a very similar scheme. Like Schmuck, the defendants had bought used vehicles, formerly rental cars, from California and Texas, and rolled back the odometers before selling them to an Arizona taxi service. To conceal the tampering, they applied for duplicate titles from those two states, and filled in the altered mileage.
They avoided using the Postal Service in their communications with sellers and buyers, relying on alternatives like Federal Express and fax. Nevertheless, the government alleged that the mailing of a title certificate to the cab company by Arizona's Department of Transportation was equivalent to the title-application mailing in Schmuck , and the defendants were convicted.
On appeal, Judge Stephen S. Trott found no distinction, calling the mailing of the title certificates "analogous" to the applications. Other types of third-party mailings—among them stock-purchase confirmation slips,  annual reports and proxy statements  —have also been found to be part of ongoing fraudulent schemes and thus supporting mail fraud convictions.
Months after Schmuck , the Seventh Circuit relied on it in overturning a district court's acquittal of the mail fraud charges of two Chicago men accused of an insurance-fraud scheme, holding that correspondence between their lawyer and the insurance company over settling the claim was part of their scheme.
Flaum followed the Supreme Court in rejecting the counterproductivity argument. In two other cases, Schmuck' s "ongoing fraudulent scheme" standard supported convictions. Invoices from a caseworker 's employer to a state public housing authority based on her falsified activity reports were found by a district court to be a necessary part of such a scheme since they displaced the loss from the employer.
In a Colorado case, a distinction argued by defendants resulted in the judge relying on a more expansive reading of Schmuck to deny their motion to dismiss the indictment. The government had alleged that, as part of a mortgage fraud scheme, the deeds and deeds of trust mailed to the lenders by the county recorder 's office constituted mail fraud. The defendants countered that, under Colorado law, deeds took effect once they were executed, so the mailing of the documents was not necessary to their scheme.
While they were right that legal ownership of the homes in Colorado was, unlike the cars in Wisconsin, transferred before the mailing of the document, he still found that those mailings served the "theories of lulling and concealment" that he saw as implied by Schmuck.
However, he dismissed charges arising from the mailings of those documents to the actual buyers, since they were not the intended victims of the scheme and thus the mailings did not further it. In , the Fifth Circuit heard United States v. Evans , an appeal of a parole officer 's conviction on mail-fraud charges stemming from falsified travel vouchers she filed to conceal a relationship and bribery scheme with a parolee. The government's theory was that the vouchers' mailing to state archives in Austin after her supervisor had approved them was an essential part of the scheme.
A divided panel overturned the convictions. In a footnote, he distinguished the case from Schmuck with the observation that Evans had no long-term relationship to maintain with the employees who kept the records. But Thomas Morrow Reavley , in dissent, found the case to have much more similarity to Schmuck than the others. The vouchers were not mailed to Austin merely for archival purposes, he noted, but because her checks for reimbursement were cut there and sent to her directly.
Further, she did have an ongoing relationship to maintain through the falsified documents. In United States v. Strong , involving another complicated used-car scheme called "punching titles", the Fifth Circuit unanimously found another significant distinction from Schmuck.
The defendants, two brothers, would buy cars at auto auctions using buyer's drafts , which allowed them to take immediate possession. While the auction house was waiting for the draft to clear, they would apply to a branch office of the Texas Department of Transportation TDOT for a certified copy CCO of the original, which they could get on the spot, using forged documents to "authenticate" themselves as the owner.
Then they sold the car to another buyer using the copy, making it difficult to recover once the auctioneer came to try and retrieve it once the draft came back unpaid. One pleaded guilty and the other opted for trial. After the jury convicted him, he successfully moved for a directed verdict of not guilty. Grady Jolly noted that while Schmuck had reached a different result than Kann , Parr and Maze about the utility of the mailings to the scheme, it had not overruled those cases.
While Strong was right that, unlike Schmuck , clear title never passed to the buyers of the fraudulently obtained cars, neither were the TDOT mailings as distant from the scheme as they had found to be in the other cases. Prosecutors argued that the mailings lent authenticity to the fraud, lulled buyers into complacency and might have helped conceal the fraud from someone checking the records in Austin. Jolly wrote that no evidence had been introduced to support the first two arguments, and as to the second, he considered their counterproductivity significant.
In , the Court heard Carter v. United States , on appeal from an unpublished decision of the Third Circuit. The petitioner, convicted of bank robbery , had, like Schmuck, been denied a jury instruction on a lesser included offense at trial.
Since he had not used force once in the bank, he argued that the jury should have been allowed to consider convicting him of bank larceny instead. By another 5—4 vote, the conviction was affirmed. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority. He undertook a lengthy comparison of the elements of the two offenses, separately codified, and concluded that differences in the wording were significant enough that bank larceny could not be a lesser included charge to bank robbery.
Most discussion of Schmuck has focused on its expansive reading of the "in furtherance" provision of the statute. Ellen Podgor, a professor at Georgia State , wrote in for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers that it would appear that the decision left previous limitations to the statute, particularly from Maze , Kann and Parr , "questionable. Shortly after the decision, Creighton law student Matthew J.
Effken wrote something similar in that institution's law review. The Court, he observed, was faced with inconsistent and conflicting precedents in its prior mail-fraud cases, and sought to reconcile them in Schmuck. By using "highly selective quotations" from those cases, he argued, the Court was able to narrow the limitations it had placed on them.
Then, it distinguished the case from Kann , Parr and Maze by treating all Schmuck's acts as part of an ongoing scheme, rather than single, discrete acts.
Then, it deferred to the jury in making that finding. As Steinberg had noted at oral argument, during the pendency of the case Congress had made odometer tampering a felony. In Nebraska Senator James Exon introduced a bill that not only did that but required stronger reporting and disclosure; it was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan as the Truth in Mileage Act of just before that year's elections.
The case's name has been found to be unintentionally humorous, since " schmuck ", from the Yiddish word for " penis ", is also a common term of abuse in American English. Supreme Court case named Schmuck v. United States ; for what it's worth, the petitioner was a used-car dealer. Text of Schmuck v. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Redirected from U. United States Supreme Court case. Retrieved March 11, Retrieved March 8, Schmuck , hereafter Schmuck II , F. Schmuck , hereafter Schmuck I , F.
Galloway , F. Shryock , F. Kann , U. Maze , U. Young , U. Sampson , U. Whitaker , F. Cova , F. Cooper , F. Hubbard , 96 F. BNE can help you deliver on your goal of energy independence with its factory trained and certified employees and contractors.
BNE works to provide training and certification of local qualified registered tribal members increasing employment and increased self sufficiency.
Each on is key component to our increasing efforts of furthering the exposure of the great products we deliver. Welcome To The Official Site of. Native touch - Global Reach. Stay Current With Our. A Dedicated Team Providing. These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'schmuck.
See more words from the same year. See the full definition for schmuck in the English Language Learners Dictionary. See words that rhyme with schmuck. What made you want to look up schmuck? Please tell us where you read or heard it including the quote, if possible.
Test Your Knowledge - and learn some interesting things along the way. Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free! A look at its gassy origins. Smart advice on modifying adjectives.
If you need a reminder. And is one way more correct than the others? The story of an imaginary word that managed to sneak past our editors and enter the dictionary. How to use a word that literally drives some people nuts. The awkward case of 'his or her'.
Petrola Schmuck & Edelsteine, Idar-Oberstein, Germany. likes. Alles rund um Schmuck und Edelsteine. a person who is in the way through excessive inattention. Urban Dictionary and our advertising partners set cookies on your computer to improve our site and the advertisements you see. If you have any questions about Schmuckal Oil Company or one of our service, please do not hesitate to contact us. By mail, phone, fax, email Schmuckal Oil Company.