Legal Opinion
United States v. Perez
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 6, 1996No. 96 Cr. 167 (RWS)PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Defendants Teddy Ramos (“Ramos”) and Orlando Perez (“Perez”) have moved to dismiss the indictment against them, and for discovery. For the reasons set forth below the motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
Prior Proceedings
The eight count indictment, SI 96 Cr. 167, handed down on March 29, 1996, charges Perez with participating in and conspiring to participate in a racketeering enterprise, the Almighty Latin King Queen Nation (the “Latin Kings”), through a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961 and…
2Cases cited76 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Kyles v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- United States v. SaavedraCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- United States v. MuyetDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- United States v. MitlofDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- United States v. BascianoDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2011
- United States v. MurgioDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.