WHITFIELD v. U.S.

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
03-1293
Petitioner 
David Whitfield
Respondent 
United States
Consolidation 
Haywood Eudon Hall, aka Don Hall v. United States, No. 03-1294
Advocates
(argued the cause for Respondent)
(argued the cause for Petitioners)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Federal district courts convicted David Whitfield and Haywood Hall of conspiracy to commit money laundering. They appealed and argued the federal money laundering law required the jury to have found proof of an "overt act" furthering the conspiracy. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected this argument, reasoning that the law lacked any language requiring proof of an overt act. Other federal appeals courts had ruled the law did require an overt act.

Question 

Did a conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956(h), require proof of an overt act furthering the conspiracy?

Conclusion 
Decision: 9 votes for U.S., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 1956

No. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the Court's unanimous ruling that because the federal money laundering law's text did not expressly make committing an overt act an element of the conspiracy offense, the government did not need to prove such an act.

Cite this Page
WHITFIELD v. U.S.. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 26 November 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_03_1293>.
WHITFIELD v. U.S., The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_03_1293 (last visited November 26, 2014).
"WHITFIELD v. U.S.," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed November 26, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_03_1293.