Legal Opinion
United States v. Gordon Vincent Eastman and Anthony Hueston A/K/A Tony Heston, A/K/A Tony Dejest. Nos. 71-1643, 71-1644
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided August 8, 1972No. 1057PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
BIGGS, Circuit Judge.
This case presents unusual circumstances as will appear hereinafter. It arises under Criminal Procedure, Eavesdropping Warrants, Chapter 546, § 814, et seq., McKinney’s 1968 Session Laws of New York, 191st Session, and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-20.
The appeals at bar arise from the same criminal proceedings in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Hueston and Eastman were indicted for unlawful manufacture of drugs in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 331(q) (1) 1 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Prior to trial, Hueston, but not…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Berger v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gelbard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- McGuire v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- United States v. Frank Roosevelt HaskinsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- United States v. VentoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- United States v. Joseph E. Cafero A/K/A Ernie, in No. 72-1577 Appeal of Dominick Vinciguerra, A/K/A Dom, in No. 72-1578Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- United States of America, in 81-2838 v. Howard U. Johnson, in 81-2839Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- United States v. William c.wolkCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972
- United States v. David ChunCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.