SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL.

v.

PALMORE ET AL.; AND SWAIN, REFORMATORY SUPERINTENDENT V. PRESSLEY

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Scully, 546 F.2d 255 (9th Cir. 1976)
  …nd may be overheard on a specific phone, he is known to the government for the purpose of § 2518(l)(b)(iv).” United States v. Bernstein, 509 F. 2d 996, 1002 (4th Cir. 1975). In United States v. Donovan, 513 F. 2d 337 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. granted, 424 U.S. 907, 96 S.Ct. 1100, 47 L.Ed.2d 310 (1976) (No. 75-212), the names of two men concededly committing the offense were known but not specified and a third about whom the applicant said he had “suspicions” was likewise undesignated. The wiretap testimony of…
• United States v. Francisco, 536 F.2d 1293 (9th Cir. 1976)
  …have been the intent of Congress. The appellant’s construction also is inconsistent with the Congressional intention to secure equal treatment of Indians and non-Indians. See United States v. Antelope, 523 F. 2d 400 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. granted, 424 U.S. 907, 96 S.Ct. 1100, 47 L.Ed.2d 811, 44 U.S.L.W. 3471 (1976). Appellant and non-Indians ordinarily should be subject to the same law when both commit the same offense in the same state. A strong showing is necessary to require us to abandon this principl…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Barletta, 565 F.2d 985 (8th Cir. 1977)
  …nventory requirements of the Act. And at that time there was pending in the Supreme Court on certiorari a review of the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Donovan, 513 F. 2d 337 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. granted, 424 U.S. 907, 96 S.Ct. 1100, 47 L.Ed.2d 310 (1976). [*988] This court took the position that substantial compliance with the requirements in question was sufficient, but that a failure on the part of the government to substantially comply with the requirements c…