United States ex rel. Mouquin v. Hecht
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtL. Hand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is important to detach the exact question raised by the appeal. The result of the misnomer does not hero arise, since, so far as it goes to the validity of the indictment, it must be raised by plea in abatement. 1 Bish. New Cr. Proc. § 677 (2). The error, being in the middle initial, is probably not available anyway. Games v. Dunn, 14 Pet. 322, 327, 10 L. Ed. 476; Cox v. Durham, 128 F. 870, 874 (C. C. A. 8); O’Halloran v. McGuirk, 167 F. 493, 494 (C. C. A. 1). All that is before us is whether the appellant is the person in fact indicted, because, though…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Games v. Stiles Ex Dem. DunnSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Cox v. DurhamCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- O'Halloran v. McGuirkCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1909
3Cited by12 opinions
- United States v. AlessiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- United States v. David Ransom HeathCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
- United States v. Louie Co GunterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1980
- United States ex rel. Curtis v. Warden of Green Haven PrisonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1971
- United States ex rel. Povlin v. HechtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.