Legal Opinion

United States v. Chiarella

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided February 6, 1951No. 21741_1PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Per curiam

In accordance with the leave which we gave when we affirmed the convictions, the parties have now filed their briefs upon the point which we then raised of our own motion: i.e. whether Counts One and Two do not duplicate each other, and whether each does not duplicate Count Three. Count Two was for “keeping in possession” counterfeit money “with intent to defraud,” and 18 U.S.C.A. § 472 makes that an offence alternative to passing, uttering, publishing, selling, or concealing. So far therefore as any possession is a necessary incident to any of the other offences, it can not have been…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Schroeder v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
  2. Woods v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. United States v. Gondolfo Miranti, United States of America v. Domenico BandoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
  2. United States v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1978
  3. People v. Savarese, New York County Courts1952
  4. United States v. Chiarella. United States Ex Rel. Chiarella v. LunneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
  5. Walter Howard Thomas v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957

20 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