UNITED STATES
v.
CORMIER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that violation of internal agency procedures does not warrant dismissal of a criminal prosecution, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
Defendant was convicted of concealing employment and earnings from the Social Security Administration to receive benefits. She appealed, arguing the S…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Petite Policy cases and more on FLexlaw
PARDEE, Circuit Judge.
The defendant in error moves to dismiss the writ of error in this case upon the following grounds: (1) No petition for a writ of error was made or hied herein. (2) No writ of error was allowed herein, on petition or otherwise. (3) The writ of error was issued by the clerk of the circuit court in which judgment sought to be reviewed was rendered, without a petition filed therefor, and without an allowance thereof by a judge of said circuit court, or by a judge of the circuit court of appeals of the Fifth circuit, authorized by law to allow such writ of error. (4) The only action taken in respect of, or in reference to, the appeal based on the said writ of error herein, by a judge authorized by law to allow *2writs of error, was the signing of the bill of exceptions herein, on the 14th day of November, 1895, and the signing of citation herein, by Hon. James W. Locke, a judge of-the said circuit court of the Southern district of Florida, on the 9th day of November, 1895, more than six months after the entry of the judgment herein sought to be reviewed, which said judgment was entered on the 1st day of May, 1895.
We have examined the record and considered the argument of counsel. The judgment in the court below was rendered on the 1st day of May, 1895, and thereupon a motion for a new trial was entered, which was overruled on thé 2d day of June, 1895. . The citation directing the defendant in error to answer in this court was signed and issued on the 9th day of November, 1895, more than six months after the entry of the judgment. sought to be reviewed, but within six months from, the date when ike motion for a new trial was overruled. The time limited for suing out a writ of error does not begin to run while there is a motion for a new trial pending. Railway Co. v. Murphy, 131 U. S. 488, 4 Sup. Ct. 497. A formal petition for the allowance of a writ of error, in order to vest the appellate com r with juriwli'dion, is not necessary. Davidson v. Lanier, 4 Wall. 447: Ex parte Virginia Com’rs, 112 U. S 177, 5 Sup. Ct. 421. Even in case of appeal,, the approval of the bond and signing of citation ha., been held to be a sufficient allowance of the appeal. Brandies v. Cochrane, 105 U. S. 262, and cases there cited. In the instant case, the judge of the circuit court signed the citation, and accepted thfe bond tendered. It seems very clear that the motion to dismiss this writ, of error bn the grounds stated should Toe overruled, and it is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parradee v. Steed, 127 Fla. 769 (Fla. 1937)…e the judgment is in fact entered at the trial under the statute.” McClellan v. Wood, 78 Fla. 407, (H. Ns. 1, 2) 83 So. 295. See also Morse v. United States, 270 U. S. 151, 46 Sup. Ct. 241, 70 L. Ed. 518; Louisville Trust Co. v. Stockton, 72 Fed. 1, 18 C. C. A. 408. In this case the judgment was entered and motion for new trial was filed October 13, 1934. On April 13, 1935, the motion for new trial was denied upon condition that a remittitur be entered. Presumably a remittitur was entered as allowed by the co…
-
Crescent Wharf & Warehouse Co. v. Pillsbury, 93 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1938)…d. 399; Alaska United Gold Mining Co. v. Keating, 9 Cir., 116 F. 561, 564; Standard Oil Co. v. Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co., 2 Cir., 32 F. 2d 182, 183; Henderson County v. Wilkins, 4 Cir., 43 F. 2d 670, 672; Louisville Trust Co. v. Stockton, 5 Cir., 72 F. 1, 2; Ross v. White, 6 Cir., 32 F. 2d 750, 752; Chamberlain Transportation Co. v. South Pier Coal Co., 7 Cir., 126 F. 165, 166; Simpson v. First National Bank, 8 Cir., 129 F. 257, 259. ■[2,3] A further ground of appellees’ motion is that “no citation…
-
Eagle Lake Improvement Co. v. United States, 141 F.2d 562 (5th Cir. 1944)…ppeal may be assessed against the United States. Aspen Mining & Smelting Co. v. Billings, 150 U.S. 31, 14 S.Ct. 4, 37 L.Ed. 986; Kingman & Co. v. Western Mfg. Co., 170 U.S. 675, 18 S.Ct. 786, 42 L.Ed. 1192; Louisville Trust Co. v. Stockton, 5 Cir., 72 F. 1; Suggs v. Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass’n, 10 Cir., 115 F. 2d 80; 28 U.S.C.A. § 230. 25 Stat. 357, 40 U.S.C.A. § 258. Rule 81(a) (7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723e. Rule 320 of the Texas Rules of C…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22 (U.S. 1977)
- United States v. NEW Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc., 553 F.2d 459 (5th Cir. 1977)
- United States v. McINNIS, 601 F.2d 1319 (5th Cir. 1979)
- Thompson v. United States, 444 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1980)
- Russell v. Parker, 436 U.S. 942 (U.S. 1978)