United States v. Central Supply Ass'n
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
WILKIN, District Judge.
Twenty-five defendants filed pleas in abatement. Some of such defendants based their pleas upon identical grounds. Others varied the assignment of reasons for their pleas. The basic reasons assigned by the pleas may be divided into four classes:
1. That the term of court at which the grand jury was impanelled had expired before the return of the indictment and that the grand jury was therefore without authority and the indictment a nullity.
2. (a) That the indictment names 115 co-conspirators whom it failed to indict, and is therefore a violation of the Fifth Amendment to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. American Medical Ass'nDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1939
- The People v. LinkIllinois Supreme Court · 1936
- United States v. HustonDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1928
- Didenti v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930
- United States v. Central Supply Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. Bernhard FeinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- United States v. Atlantic Commission Co.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1942
- United States v. 1,960 Acres of LandDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1944
- United States v. Central Supply Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1947