Legal Opinion
United States v. Kulp
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 25, 1973No. Crim. 72-272PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDWARD R. BECKER,. District Judge.
OPINION
I. Preliminary Statement
The defendants in this case were charged with receiving and concealing goods in excess of $5,000 moving in interstate commerce from Dallas and Houston, Texas to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, knowing the same to have been stolen. 1 2The three defendants whose post trial motions are before us (Kulp, Dougherty and Powell), were jointly tried and were convicted by a jury. 2 Their motions have been variously denominated as motions for judgment of acquittal (Rule 29(c)), new trial (Rule 33), and arrest of judgment (Rule 34),…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kallir, Philips, Ross, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
- United States v. VignolaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- United States v. PhiferDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
- United States v. BloomDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
- State v. ShawCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1980
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.