Legal Opinion
United States v. Caminata
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 29, 1912No. 12PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Prosecution by the United States against Manoel Caminata. On motions for new trial and arrest of judgment.
1Opinion of the Court
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
[1] The argument on behalf of the government will appear by the following summary of the excellent brief presented by the Assistant United States.Attorney:
“This motion presents a question of wide importance to the government, vitally affecting the future enforcement of the Opium Act of 1909 (Act Feb. 9; 1909, 35 St. 614). By the first section of that act, it is made unlawful ‘to import into the United States opium in any form or any preparation or derivative therefrom: Provided, that opium, * * * other than smoking opium or opium prepared for smoking, may be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Keck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- United States v. ChesbroughDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1910
3Cited by9 opinions
- Pon Wing Quong v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- United States v. Ralph McKenzieCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
- Palmero v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1940
- United States v. SischoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
- United States v. Lee Foo YungDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1942
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.