United States v. Heyman’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 788 · 1986
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2017 · most notably Ratzlaf et Ux United States (1994), United States v. Nersesian (1987)
47 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 31 U.S.C. § 5311 · 31 U.S.C. § 5313 · 31 U.S.C. § 5322
Relies on Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Boyce Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States · California Bankers Assn. v. Shultz · Emmons v. United States · Hardin v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) 31 U.S.C. § 5313 (a) authorizes the secretary of treasury to enact regulations specifying when financial institutions must file CTRs. (2) Under 31 C.F.R. § 103.22 (a)(1), the secretary has required reports on every transaction involving $10,000 in currency. At the same time, the regulation requires that CTRs be made on forms prescribed by the secretary. (3) The instructions on the CTR form state that multiple transactions, which in one day total more than $10,000, must be treated as a single transaction if the bank is aware of them. (4) This instruction is the Treasury Department’s interpretation of the requirement set forth in the statute and the regulations. (5) As a result, banks have a duty to file CTRs for structured transactions if performed on the same day. (6) Therefore, if the banks fail to file, individual defendants who structured are liable under 18 U.S.C. § 2 (b).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“so as to avoid the reporting requirements “by dividing large sums into smaller portions and depositing them into newly-created accounts on the same day”). 14 .Defendants reliance on Anzalone and other pre-§ 5324(3) cases to buttress their contention that the instant indictment is based upon an impermissibly vague statute is unpersuasive. Those cases have nothing to do with § 5324(3). They refused to allow convictions for”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Multiple transactions by or for any person which in one day total more than $10,000 should be treated as a single transaction if the financial institution is aware of them.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.