Legal Opinion
United States v. Irick
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided January 4, 1974No. Crim. 73-H-376PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
NOEL, District Judge.
In this criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 111, each defendant moves to dismiss the indictment for failure to charge an offense. Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(a). The indictment charges defendants “did forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, and interfere with a Special Agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of Justice.” Section 111 of Title 18 prohibits such conduct when directed toward any person designated in 18 U.S.C. § 1114. Section 1114 lists numerous groups of federal employees and officers including “any…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. HarrissSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Bouie v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- United States v. WiltbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
- United States v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Daniel Reid and Theodore E. Thomas, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- River Oaks Motor Homes, Inc. v. Winnebago Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1974
- United States v. Daniel Reid and Theodore E. Thomas, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975