Legal Opinion

United States v. Bachman

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided October 4, 1966No. Crim. 66-77PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

MARSH, District Judge.

Upon amply sufficient evidence, the defendant was convicted by a jury of ■income tax evasion for the calendar years 1959, 1960 and 1961. 26 U.S.C.A. § 7201. He now moves for judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, for a new trial.

First, the defendant contends that the testimony of Keith W. Hyatt, a special agent with the Intelligence Division of the Internal Revenue Service, should have been stricken pursuant to Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Hyatt’s testimony concerned defendant’s bank deposits…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. Joseph L. SclafaniCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
  4. George Kohatsu v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
  5. I. C. Turner and E. v. Turner v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1955

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Harper v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
  2. United States v. Enrico SqueriCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
  3. Louis Stuart, Vivian Stuart and Rechel Stuart v. United States of America and Alson E. Lancaster, Special Agent, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
  4. United States v. TurzynskiDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1967
  5. United States v. CharamellaDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1968

3 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