About: Skilling v. United States

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Skilling v. United States Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/c/AbMrdpnZ67

Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The case involves former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and the honest services fraud statute, which prohibits "a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services". The Court found the statute vague, meaning it was written in a manner that almost anyone could be convicted of the statute by engaging in most legal activities. However, the Court refused to void the statute as unconstitutionally vague. The Court decided to limit the application of the statute only to defendants who hold a fiduciary duty and they participate in bribery and kickback schemes. The Court supported its decision not to rule the statute void

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Thing case Legal Case unit of work Legal case yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCasesOfTheRobertsCourt yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Event100029378 yago:Happening107283608 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case
rdfs:label	Skilling v. United States (en)
rdfs:comment	Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The case involves former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and the honest services fraud statute, which prohibits "a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services". The Court found the statute vague, meaning it was written in a manner that almost anyone could be convicted of the statute by engaging in most legal activities. However, the Court refused to void the statute as unconstitutionally vague. The Court decided to limit the application of the statute only to defendants who hold a fiduciary duty and they participate in bribery and kickback schemes. The Court supported its decision not to rule the statute void (en)
foaf:name	(en) Jeffrey K. Skilling v. United States (en)
dct:subject	Enron scandal United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court United States Sixth Amendment jury case law Void for vagueness case law 2010 in United States case law Honest services fraud case law
Wikipage page ID	27838745 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1088452889 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Black v. United States Enron scandal Honest services fraud United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court Enron Bruce Weyhrauch United States Sixth Amendment jury case law Void for vagueness case law Washington Post 5th Cir. Kickback (bribery) Jeffrey Skilling 2010 in United States case law L. Ed. 2d Supreme Court of the United States Fiat money Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution New York Times Vagueness doctrine Honest services fraud case law Bribe F.3d National Law Review
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/business/29fraud.html%3F=dbk http://www.marketwatch.com/story/court-could-redefine-insider-trading-2011-01-28%3Fpagenumber=1 http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle=2752&context=llr&sei-redir=1&referer=http:/www.google.de/url%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dskilling%2520v.%2520united%2520states%2520void%2520for%2520vagueness%2520recommend%2520citation%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CDMQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdigitalcommons.lmu.edu%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D2752%2526context%253Dllr%26ei%3DyHrgUOaYKuml4ATToYCYAg%26usg%3DAFQjCNFnFHl8Smz_QzGQHxp1CLP4quEtAQ%23search=%22skilling%20v.%20united%20states%20void%20vagueness%20recommend%20citation%22 http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol44/iss3/19 https://ssrn.com/abstract=1734551 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/358/ https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20090106055 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/08-1394 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1394.pdf https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080605934.html http://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme-court-limits-scope-honest-services-statute-skilling-v-united-states
sameAs	Skilling v. United States Skilling v. United States Skilling v. United States Skilling v. United States
Subsequent	4.523256E8 (second)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Usc dbt:Ussc dbt:US_federal_public_corruption_law dbt:Sixth_Amendment
docket	8 (xsd:integer)
JoinMajority	Roberts, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito ; Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas ; Roberts, Stevens, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor (en)
LawsApplied	U.S. Const. amend. V; (en)
oyez	https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/08-1394
ParallelCitations	172800.0 (second)
Prior	25920.0 (second)
USPage	358 (xsd:integer)
USVol	561 (xsd:integer)
ArgueDate	0001-03-01 (xsd:gMonthDay)
ArgueYear	2010 (xsd:integer)
case	Skilling v. United States, (en)
DecideDate	0001-06-24 (xsd:gMonthDay)
DecideYear	2010 (xsd:integer)
fullname	Jeffrey K. Skilling v. United States (en)
Holding	Pretrial publicity and community prejudice did not prevent Skilling from obtaining a fair trial. However, the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1346, is properly confined to cover only bribery and kickback schemes, which do not include Skilling's alleged misconduct. So construed, §1346 is not unconstitutionally vague. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. (en)
justia	https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/358/
Litigants	Skilling v. United States (en)
majority	Ginsburg (en)
other source	Supreme Court (en)
other url	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1394.pdf
has abstract	Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346. The case involves former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and the honest services fraud statute, which prohibits "a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services". The Court found the statute vague, meaning it was written in a manner that almost anyone could be convicted of the statute by engaging in most legal activities. However, the Court refused to void the statute as unconstitutionally vague. The Court decided to limit the application of the statute only to defendants who hold a fiduciary duty and they participate in bribery and kickback schemes. The Court supported its decision not to rule the statute void for vagueness on its obligation to construe and not condemn Congress' laws. Ultimately, Skilling's sentence was reduced by 10 years as a result. (en)
Concurrence	Scalia (en) Alito (en)
Concurrence/Dissent	Sotomayor (en)
JoinConcurrence	Thomas; Kennedy (en)

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git147 as of Sep 06 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3331 as of Sep 2 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 53 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software