Benchlight The federal appellate judiciary

Panel

The judges who heard this appeal.

Case history

  • Aug. 5, 2019
    decided Decision issued in United States v. Bryan Puckett

Opinions and writings

Lead opinion Author not recorded Aug. 5, 2019

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. *551In this case the government charged the defendants with the wrong crimes. Amir Banyan and Bryan Puckett engaged in a scheme in which they eventually obtained more than $5 million from a pair of mortgage companies by means of fraudulent mortgage applications. The scheme was revealed about two years after it began. H…

Open in Benchlight

Opinion By Raymond M. Kethledge Aug. 5, 2019

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0179p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ┐ Plaintiff-Appellee, │…

Open in Benchlight Court PDF

Concurrence Author not recorded Aug. 5, 2019

OLIVER, District Judge, Concurring. I agree with the majority that the following arguments made by the Government are clearly not well taken: (1) that the jury could infer that the banks were defrauded on evidence that the mortgage companies were wholly-owned subsidiaries of FDIC-insured banks; (2) that the jury could infer that the mortgage companies' funds were under the custody or control of the parent banks, beca…

Open in Benchlight

Dissent Author not recorded Aug. 5, 2019

SILER, Circuit Judge, dissenting. As seen from the majority opinion, very few cases have discussed this dilemma. It would have been easy for the prosecution to have charged the defendant with mail or wire fraud before the statute of limitations expired, but it was not effected for some reason. Now, we must decide whether the conduct by defendants amounted to a violation of the bank fraud statute. I think it did and I…

Open in Benchlight