GREENBERG

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Emspak v. United States, 349 U.S. 190 (U.S. 1955)
  …of crime and its detection incrimination may be approached and achieved by obscure and unlikely lines of inquiry.” United States v. Burr, 25 Fed. Cas. 38, at 40, No. 14,692e. Blau v. United States, 340 U. S. 159. See also Brunner v. United States, 343 U. S. 918, reversing 190 F. 2d 167 (C. A. 9th car.). In United States v. Singleton, 193 F. 2d 464 (C. A. 3d Cir.), the defendant was convicted of contempt for refusing to answer the question “What business is he in?” with respect to three named individuals.…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Coffey, 198 F.2d 438 (3d Cir. 1952)
  …Singleton a writ of certiorari and reversed his conviction. Singleton v. United States, 343 U.S. 944, 72 S.Ct. 1041. The percuriam order read: “The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed. Greenberg v. United States, 343 U.S. 918, 72 S.Ct. 674; Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 71 S.Ct. 814, 95 L.Ed. 1118.” We perceive no rational basis upon which the Court which reversed the Singleton conviction could affirm the conviction of Coffey in this case. Accordingly, the jud…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• The Communist Party OF The United States v. United States, 331 F.2d 807 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
  …tricia Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 159, 71 S.Ct. 223, 95 L.Ed. 170 (1950) (employment by the Party or “intimate knowledge of its workings”); Irving Blau v. United States, 340 U.S. 332, 71 S.Ct. 301, 95 L.Ed. 306 (1951); Brunner v. United States, 343 U.S. 918, 72 S.Ct. 674, 96 L.Ed. 1332 (1952) (attendance at Party meetings); Quinn v. United States, 349 U.S. 155, 75 S.Ct. 668, 99 L.Ed. 964 (1955) (membership). It is against this background that we consider whether an officer or non-officer was availabl…

Authorities Cited

• Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479 (U.S. 1951)