Legal Opinion
United States v. John Doe, AKA Angel L. Camacho, AKA Angel Lopez Gonzalez
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided April 17, 1975No. 74-1208PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COFFIN, Chief Judge.
The principal argument raised in this criminal appeal is that the district court failed to make adequate inquiry and findings concerning alleged private communications between jurors and third persons.
There were four episodes. On the first day of a five day trial, after the jury had been impanelled but before evidence had been introduced, defense counsel noted that on his way to lunch he had observed a witness for the government “in the hall discussing I don’t know what . . . within the realm of certain Jurors”, and complained to the marshal, who “just let the Jurors go…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Clyde Mattox v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Turner v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Parker v. GladdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- John P. Tillman, Robert Barber Moore, Johnny C. Wilson, Larry Fox, Donald P. Stone and Michael W. Simmons v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Remmer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- United States v. BoylanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Fred Eubanks, Eugene Martinez, Leroy Jones, Henry D. YanezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- United States v. John Edward Jones, A/K/A Liddy Jones, A/K/A Malik Shariff, United States of America v. Robert Avon Jones, A/K/A BobbyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
- United States v. VentoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp., Matthew B. Connolly, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.