United States v. Minkoff
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellants’ motion asks that we remand this case to the district court in order that they may there seek a new trial for newly discovered evidence. Under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. 1 we should only entertain such a motion in case the district court indicates, after a hearing, that it intends to grant a motion for a new trial.
1. Rakes v. United States, 4 Cir., 163 F.2d 771; Dession, New Rules of Criminal Procedure, 56 Yale L.J. (1947) 197, 232; N. Y. Univ. School of Law Institute-Proceedings, Vol. VI, p. 208.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rakes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
3Cited by15 opinions
- United States v. Gregory ComuladaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- Metcalf v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1952
- United States v. Robert A. Frame, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Zamloch v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- Neil W. Ashe v. United States of America, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1961
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.