Legal Opinion

United States v. Carrozza

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 11, 1990No. SSSS89 Cr. 239 (GLG)PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GOETTEL, District Judge:

This action already possesses a well-worn procedural history. Suffice it to say that four defendants remain named in a single thirty-six count indictment, with various other previously named defendants having already pled or agreed to plead guilty. Presently before this court are motions to sever brought by each of the remaining defendants. Additionally, Anthony Carroz-za has moved to dismiss certain counts of the indictment based on multiplicity. 1 At this juncture, we note that the government has consented to sever Jusuf Cekic from the action. Consequently, we…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Oregon v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. United States v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Wong Tai v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. United States v. UptonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1994
  2. United States v. LechDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1995
  3. United States v. BergerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
  4. United States v. FordeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
  5. United States v. Triumph Capital Group, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2002

5 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