HANDY

v.

PATUXENT INSTITUTION DIRECTOR

Citator

Cited By (14 total)

• The United States v. Bazinet, 462 F.2d 982 (8th Cir. 1972)
  …this record, since it is insufficient to show that the consent was not the fruit of an illegal arrest, in view of the high standard of proof which the government must meet. . See, Schoepflin v. United States, 391 F. 2d 390 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 865, 89 S.Ct. 146, 21 L.Ed.2d 133 (1968); United States v. Menke, 339 F.Supp. 1023 (W.D.Pa.1972).…
• United States v. Sheard, 473 F.2d 139 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
  …on appeal unless it is “clearly erroneous.” See Hoover v. Beto, 467 F. 2d 516 (5th Cir. 1972); United States v. J. B. Kramer Grocery Co., Inc., 418 F. 2d 987 (8th Cir. 1969); Schoepflin v. United States, 391 F. 2d 390 (9th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 865, 89 S.Ct. 146, 21 L.Ed.2d 133 (1968); Green v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 408, 389 F. 2d 949 (1967); Villano v. United States, 310 F. 2d 680 (10th Cir. 1962). A finding is not “clearly erroneous” unless the reviewing court is left with the defi…
• United States v. Harris, 530 F.2d 576 (4th Cir. 1976)
  …Since the bank was a national bank, as its official name clearly discloses, it was within the coverage of § 2113(a) regardless of its insured status with the FDIC. Mauro, supra; Schoepflin v. United States, 391 F. 2d 390 (9 Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 865, 89 S.Ct. 146, 21 L.Ed.2d 133 (1968); cf. United States v. Harper, 241 F. 2d 103 (7 Cir. 1957). Although the government may rely upon more than one basis for asserting jurisdiction in a prosecution under § 2113, the allegation in the indictment as t…