Le More v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana; Rufus E. Foster, Judge. Albert Le More and Edward E. Carriere were convicted of having devised a scheme or artifice to defraud, etc., in violation of Penal Code, § 215, and they bring error.
1Opinion of the Court
GRUBB, District Judge.
[1] 1. The plaintiffs in error were convicted of having devised a scheme or artifice to defraud in violation of section 215 of the Panal Code (Act March 4, 1909, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1130 [Comp. St. 1916, § 10385]). They were convicted under two indict‘nients, which were consolidated before trial, and tried together. Plaintiffs in error objected to the consolidation, and assign the order of the court directing the consolidation as error; but this was a discretionary matter, and no abuse of discretion is shown in the record.
[2, 3] 2. The plaintiffs in error also assign as…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Caminetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Edgington v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- National Bank of Commerce of Boston v. Merchants' Nat. Bank of MemphisSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Myrick v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- United States v. Vernon J. FontenotCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- United States v. KelleyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Kreiner v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- Deaver v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1946
- Worthington v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1933
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.