Seventh Circuit Criminal Case of the Week: When Is It a Crime to Stuff the Drawing Box?

In April 2005, the Ho-Chunk casino in Baraboo, Wisconsin, sponsored a drawing in which one lucky winner would receive $10,000.  The rules of the drawing identified a number of ways that participants could obtain entry forms, with each new entry increasing a participant’s odds of winning.  Two participants, however, chose to circumvent the prescribed processes by photocopying thousands of entry forms and stuffing the drawing box.  By the time of the drawing, Darwin Moore and Bruce Knutson had their names on more than sixty percent of the entry forms.  Knutson won the drawing, but then faced federal criminal charges, thanks to snitching by Moore’s ex-girlfriend.  Eventually, Moore and Knutson were both convicted of theft from an Indian gaming establishment, and each received a ten-month sentence.

On appeal, the two defendants argued that the indictment was insufficient because it failed to state an offense.  They observed that the drawing rules did not expressly prohibit the submission of photocopied forms and asserted that they were merely exploiting a loophole, rather than committing a crime.  The Seventh Circuit, however, affirmed their convictions in United States v. Moore (Nos. 08-1177 & 08-1615) (Evans, J.).

Continue ReadingSeventh Circuit Criminal Case of the Week: When Is It a Crime to Stuff the Drawing Box?

Seeing the Error of Their Ways

Chad Oldfather has a new article on SSRN entitled “Error Correction.”  Having analyzed various other aspects of the appellate process in earlier articles, Chad here turns to the most mundane function of the appellate court.  Where most scholarship on appellate process focuses on the lawmaking authority of appellate courts, few cases actually result in appellate courts breaking important new legal ground; more commonly, appellate review is simply a search for error based on established precedents.  But what exactly is “error”?  The question has received little scholarly attention to date, but Chad now remedies that neglect in his characteristically thoughtful fashion.  Here is the abstract of his article, which is forthcoming in the Indiana Law Journal

Continue ReadingSeeing the Error of Their Ways

New Issue of Marquette Law Review

I am delighted to report that the spring issue of the Marquette Law Review is now available on-line.  Here are the contents of volume 92, issue 3:

ESSAY

“IDEOLOGY IN” OR “CULTURAL COGNITION OF” JUDGING: WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
Dan M. Kahan

ARTICLES

A MATTER OF TRUST: SHOULD NO-RELIANCE CLAUSES BAR CLAIMS FOR FRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT OF CONTRACT?
Allen Blair

THE DILEMMA OF THE VENGEFUL CLIENT: A PRESCRIPTIVE FRAMEWORK FOR COOLING THE FLAMES OF ANGER
Robin Wellford Slocum

MAKING SENSE OF SCHAUMBURG: SEEKING COHERENCE IN FIRST AMENDMENT CHARITABLE SOLICITATION LAW
John D. Inazu

COMMENTS

WORKSITE RAIDS AND IMMIGRATION NORMS: A “STICKY” PROBLEM
Benjamin Crouse

SAME-SEX DIVORCE AND WISCONSIN COURTS: IMPERFECT HARMONY?
Louis Thorson

Continue ReadingNew Issue of Marquette Law Review