United States v. Hansen 1
C12 - Business Law
Case Analysis 2
United States v. Hansen
Summarize the facts of the case
George Vernon Hansen served as a representative for the second Congressional District
of Idaho during the years 1965 and 1969 and then again from 1975, right up to his conviction in
1984. Hansen was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C § 1001 by way of submitting false statements
concerning matters within the jurisdiction of a division inside the United States. Hansen’s
conviction was due to his failure to disclose a $50,000 loan from 1978 ,which he gave to his
spouse, on his EIGA forms which was co-signed by Nelson Bunker Hunt. Hansen also omitted a
$84,475 profit made from silver commodities which was made during 1979, a loan just over
$61,000 received from Nelson Baker Hunt during 1980 along with $135,000 in total for a
collection of loans received from private individuals during 1981. Hansen contested how the
facts of the case applied under section 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and moved to dismiss the charge
however the court denied this motion. Hansen tried to appeal however the court established that
the all counts from the conviction of 1984 was to be upheld. Hansen also filed a motion to
receive another trial as well as other relief to which the court denied. Hansen served 1 year in the
federal prison facility and was instructed to pay a total of $40,000 for the four fines incurred.
During a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Ohio on March
12th, 1992, Hansen was convicted of a total of forty-five counts of bank fraud. Seven days later,
Judge Edward Lodge sentenced Hansen to serve forty-eight months in prison while he was still
in federal custody. This made the sentence a total length of three years for Hansen. Because of
another trial of similar nature being overruled in 1995, Hansen filed a motion for the court to
This study source was downloaded by 100000812546443 from CourseHero.com on 11-16-2022 08:07:06 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/44529922/BUS-LAW-CASE-ANALYSIS-2-ASHWORTH-COLLEGEdocx/
C12 - Business Law
Case Analysis 2
United States v. Hansen
Summarize the facts of the case
George Vernon Hansen served as a representative for the second Congressional District
of Idaho during the years 1965 and 1969 and then again from 1975, right up to his conviction in
1984. Hansen was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C § 1001 by way of submitting false statements
concerning matters within the jurisdiction of a division inside the United States. Hansen’s
conviction was due to his failure to disclose a $50,000 loan from 1978 ,which he gave to his
spouse, on his EIGA forms which was co-signed by Nelson Bunker Hunt. Hansen also omitted a
$84,475 profit made from silver commodities which was made during 1979, a loan just over
$61,000 received from Nelson Baker Hunt during 1980 along with $135,000 in total for a
collection of loans received from private individuals during 1981. Hansen contested how the
facts of the case applied under section 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and moved to dismiss the charge
however the court denied this motion. Hansen tried to appeal however the court established that
the all counts from the conviction of 1984 was to be upheld. Hansen also filed a motion to
receive another trial as well as other relief to which the court denied. Hansen served 1 year in the
federal prison facility and was instructed to pay a total of $40,000 for the four fines incurred.
During a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Ohio on March
12th, 1992, Hansen was convicted of a total of forty-five counts of bank fraud. Seven days later,
Judge Edward Lodge sentenced Hansen to serve forty-eight months in prison while he was still
in federal custody. This made the sentence a total length of three years for Hansen. Because of
another trial of similar nature being overruled in 1995, Hansen filed a motion for the court to
This study source was downloaded by 100000812546443 from CourseHero.com on 11-16-2022 08:07:06 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/44529922/BUS-LAW-CASE-ANALYSIS-2-ASHWORTH-COLLEGEdocx/
