BANDY

v.

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Barnes, 383 F.2d 287 (6th Cir. 1967)
  …15 L.Ed.2d 853, we will not, in the circumstances before us, employ Rule 52(b) F.R.Crim. P. to find plain error in the trial judge’s conduct. IV. Constitutionality of Travel Act. In United States v. Compton, 365 F. 2d 1, 3 (CA 6, 1966) cert. den. 385 U.S. 956, 87 S.Ct. 391, 17 L.Ed.2d 303, we sustained the constitutionality of the Travel Act. We are not persuaded to here depart from that holding. The convictions of all defendants under count one, the conspiracy count, is reversed and a judgment of acqui…
• United States v. Nelson, 459 F.2d 884 (6th Cir. 1972)
  …s an improper reference in argument to the refusal to answer. I find no reason to disturb the conviction on this ground. See United States v. Maffei, 450 F. 2d 928 (6th Cir. 1971); United States v. Compton, 365 F. 2d 1, 4-6 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 956, 87 S.Ct. 391, 17 L. Ed.2d 303 (1966). The remaining issues on appeal, including the attack upon the sentencing process, are insubstantial and in my view do not require discussion. I would affirm. . I observe that the six categories of exigent ci…
• United States v. Vandetti, 623 F.2d 1144 (6th Cir. 1980)
  …ee persons involved in the illegal transaction, the defendant, an agent, and the witness who asserted his fifth amendment privilege. The Court quoted with approval from its holding in United States v. Compton, 365 F. 2d 1,5 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 956, 87 S.Ct. 391, 17 L.Ed.2d 303 (1966): “Government counsel need not refrain from calling a witness whose attorney appears in court and advises court and counsel that the witness will claim his privilege and will not testify. However, to call such a…