CALDWELL

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Boyce Leon Mosco and Fred John Hansen v. United States, 301 F.2d 180 (9th Cir. 1962)
  …e of police powers of the individual states in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.” As appellee points out, this exact same point was raised in Clark v. United States, 10 Cir. 1950, 184 F. 2d 952, cert. denied 340 U.S. 955, 71 S.Ct. 566, 95 L.Ed. 688. There the Court said: “[I]t is urged that 588c [now § 2113] is an unwarranted usurpation of authority by Congress and an interference with the exercise of the police powers of the individual states in violation of the T…
• United States v. Jackson, 756 F.2d 703 (9th Cir. 1985)
  …onfinement after arrest for a robbery need not occur simultaneously with the robbery itself; the test is not the time and place of the murder, but its relation to the robbery. Clark v. United States, 184 F. 2d 952, 954 (10th Cir.1950), cert. denied, 340 U.S. 955, 71 S.Ct. 566, 95 L.Ed. 688 (1951). Hence, § 2113(e) has been applied in situations where a murder occurs long after the date of the robbery. United States v. Etheridge, 424 F. 2d 951 (6th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 993, 91 S.Ct. 463, 27 L.E…
• Paolo v. Garfinkel, 200 F.2d 280 (3d Cir. 1952)
  …there is comparatively little appellate court authority for it.3 The judgment of the district court will be affirmed. . Sec also Slavik v. Miller, D.C.W.D.Pa. 3950, 89 F.Supp. 573, affirmed per curiam 3 Cir., 1950, 184 F. 2d 575, certiorari denied 340 U.S. 955, 71 S.Ct. 560, 95 L. Ed. 688. . In tliis Circuit compare the decision below in this ease with de Koning v. Zimmerman, D.C.E.D.Pa.3950, 89 F. Supp. 893, which interpreted our decision in the Podovinnikoff case to stand only for the proposition, prev…