Legal Opinion

United States v. Mangiaracina

District Court, W.D. Missouri

Decided August 2, 1950No. 17780PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REEVES, Chief Judge.

The motion to dismiss is in two parts. First, it is very comprehensive in asking for the dismissal of all of the counts in the indictment on the grounds:

“(a) That the defendant was required by a subpoena to appear before the Grand Jury as a witness; * * * was examined and required to testify to matters and things relating to and material to the charge made in the indictment against him, * ^ :[i »
“(b) In the alternative, ‘ * * * aver-ments of the motion are directed against Count I of the indictment on the ground that’ * * * it fails to state sufficient facts to constitute…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Mulloney v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1935
  3. United States v. EdgertonDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1897
  4. O'CONNELL v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  5. United States v. KimballU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Carlson v. United States (Three Cases)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1954
  2. United States v. WortmanDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1960
  3. United States v. RaineyDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1950
  4. United States v. HaasDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
  5. United States v. BahcallDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API