Legal Opinion
United States v. Tolczeki
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided July 29, 1985No. Civ. A. CR85-105PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DOWD, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Motion of the Defendant, John Tolczeki, Jr., to dismiss the indictment against him in Case No. CR85-105 on grounds that it “is contrary to the First, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” Defendant’s Motion is opposed by the Plaintiff, United States of America. For the reasons which follow, Defendant’s Motion is denied.
Defendant argues that 18 U.S.C. § 2252 violates the fifth amendment due process clause by failing to give adequate notice to persons potentially subject to it. Defendant argues that…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. Stephen A. KnoxCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Alessandro Moncini, Aka: Sandro MonciniCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. LambDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1996
- United States v. Stephen A. KnoxCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- United States v. CharbonneauDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.