FALL

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• Ewing v. State, 81 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1955)
  …money •under false pretenses, but they have no bearing upon the case at bar.. While there are no Florida cases in point, the matter has been decided in other jurisdictions. In Fall v. United States, 60 App.D.C. 124, 49 F. 2d 506, certiorari denied 283 U.S. 867, 51 S.Ct. 657, 75 L.Ed. 1471, Albert Fall, former Secretary of the Interior, had been •indicted for violation of a federal bribery •statute, 18 U.S.C. § 207.- While the fed- • eral statute differs in language from our -own, the principle of the Fall…
• Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (U.S. 1948)
  …ns [*476] where evidence as to other transactions or a course of fraudulent conduct is admitted to establish fraudulent intent as an element of the crime charged. See, e. g., Fall v. United States, 60 App. D. C. 124, 49 F. 2d 506, certiorari denied, 283 U. S. 867; Hatem v. United States, 42 F. 2d 40, certiorari denied, 282 U. S. 887; Williamson v. United States, 207 U. S. 425; Allis v. United States, 155 U. S. 117; Wood v. United States, 16 Pet. 342. As long ago as 1865, Chief Justice Cockburn said, “The tr…
• United States v. Haldeman, 559 F.2d 31 (D.C. Cir. 1976)
  …d a tremendous amount of pretrial publicity are in those respects similar to the Teapot Dome trial of Albert B. Fall, Secretary of the Interior in the Harding administration (Fall [*158] v. United States, 60 App.D.C. 124, 49 F. 2d 506, cert. denied, 283 U.S. 867, 51 S.Ct. 657, 75 L.Ed. 1471 (1931)). Because of these similarities it is relevant to consider the procedures followed in selecting the Fall (Teapot Dome) jury. Secretary Fall was tried on a charge of bribery for allegedly receiving $100,000 from E…