Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated October 29, 1992. United States of America v. John Doe

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided July 21, 1993No. 1497, Docket 93-1070Published

1Dissent

*95ALTIMARI, Circuit Judge,.

dissenting:

Because I believe that the Supreme Court’s pronouncement in Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 634-35, 6 S.Ct. 524, 534, 29 L.Ed. 746 (1886) that “a compulsory production of the private books and papers of the owner of goods sought to be forfeited ... is compelling him to be a witness against himself, within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution” remains valid, I respectfully dissent.

The proposition in Boyd regarding the Fifth Amendment protection of private papers has been repeated in a number of subsequent opinions. See Wilson v. United…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. HaydenSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Andresen v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Couch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

10 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