Legal Opinion

In Re Proceedings to Enforce Grand Jury Subpoenas

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 14, 1977No. Misc. 76-417PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOSEPH S. LORD, III, Chief Judge.

On November 4,1976, Anna Jane Feeney, Albert E. Pace, Henry Pace, Jr., Maryann Pace, Joseph Trout, Dolores Trout and Patrick Joseph Dixon appeared before the grand jury pursuant to subpoena, but refused to comply with the grand jury demand for handwriting exemplars, fingerprints, photographs and voice exemplars (“physical characteristics”). We must decide whether a defendant in a civil contempt action 1 stemming from the defendant’s refusal to divulge physical characteristics may defend by asserting that the grand jury subpoena was the primary product…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. United States v. CalandraSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Davis v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Gelbard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. United States v. MaraSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mustafa v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  2. State v. HowardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  3. United States v. ManuszakDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. County of Oakland by Kuhn v. City of DetroitDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1984
  5. Mockaitis v. HarcleroadDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1996

2 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