United States v. Coffey
District Court, E.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GLASSER, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
The grand jury returned a two count superseding indictment (the “indictment”) against defendants Arthur Coffey (“Coffey”), Harold Daggett (“Daggett”) and Albert Cernadas (“Cernadas”) (collectively, “defendants”). Before the Court are various pretrial motions by defendants. 1 Coffey and Daggett seek to join all motions made by codefendants to the extent that such motions are not inconsistent with their own. 2 Therefore, to that extent, the Court will rule on the pending motions as if they were filed by all defendants.
The indictment arises…
2Cases cited70 opinions
- Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Hamling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Zafiro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Stirone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Sekhar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- United States v. GottiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- United States v. International Longshoremen's Ass'nDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2007
- World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. Jakks Pacific, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- United States v. GottiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.