HARTENFELD

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Arlen, 252 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1958)
  …y v. United States, 9 Cir., 1953, 208 F. 2d 583, 592; Spevak v. United States, 4 Cir., 1946, 158 F. 2d 594, 597, certiorari denied 330 U.S. 821, 67 S.Ct. 771, 91 L.Ed. 1272; United States v. Hartenfeld, 7 Cir., 1940, 113 F. 2d 359, certiorari denied 311 U.S. 647, 61 S.Ct. 30, 85 L.Ed. 413. We see no abuse of discretion here. After the filing of the indictment Arlen had over three months to prepare his defense and he was informed six weeks in advance that trial was set for June 25. The trial was delayed a f…
• The United States v. Echeles, 222 F.2d 144 (7th Cir. 1955)
  …review by upper courts, unless the discretion be abused. United States v. Vrilium Products Co., 185 F. 2d 3, at page 5; United States v. Glasser, 7 Cir., 116 F. 2d 690, 701; United States v. Hartenfeld, 7 Cir., 113 F. 2d 359, 362, certiorari denied 311 U.S. 647, 61 S.Ct. 30, 85 L.Ed. 413; U.S. v. Cook, 7 Cir., 184 F. 2d 642, 643. We hold that the refusal to grant a continuance under the circumstances above outlined was not an abuse of discretion and does not constitute error. 6. The court, over objection,…
• Fahning v. United States, 299 F.2d 579 (5th Cir. 1962)
  …34 F. 2d 125, cert. den. 319 U.S. 776, 63 S.Ct. 1434, 87 L.Ed. 1722; Hines v. United States, 10th Cir. 1942, 131 F. 2d 971; Kelling v. United States, 8th Cir. 1941, 121 F. 2d 428; United States v. Hartenfeld, 7th Cir. 1940, 113 F. 2d 359, cert. den. 311 U.S. 647, 61 S.Ct. 30, 85 L.Ed. 413; 23 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 969, page 876. There is no merit in the assertion of error. The appellant and other defendants claimed they were entrapped by the promise of a Florida Beverage Enforcement Agent, Hilman Wood, to f…