Legal Opinion

Melaragno v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 4, 1937No. 6174PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARIS, District Judge.

The appellant in this case was convicted of making and fermenting mash fit for distillation in violation of section 3282, Rev.St., as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. § 1185, and of depositing and concealing 160 gallons of fermented wine in violation of section 3450, Rev.St, 26 U.S.C.A. § 1156. During the course of the trial the Assistant United States Attorney was permitted over the objection of appellant’s counsel to ask the appellant upon cross-examination: “Are you the same Patsy Melaragno that was convicted of having a 25-gallon still on the Melaragno farm, and sentenced…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Funk v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. United States v. ReidSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
  4. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  5. Commonwealth v. QuarantaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Valli v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1938
  2. United States v. GonellaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
  3. United States v. PetersonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Verro v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1938
  5. United States v. McGloneDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1937

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API