COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
v.
SMITH; UNITED STATES V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; COUNTY OF MINERAL, NEVADA, V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL UNION NUMBER 406, ET AL. V. POSTMA, DOING BUSINESS AS HAROLD F. POSTMA GRAVEL CO., ET AL.; CALIFORNIA ELECTRIC POWER CO. V. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION ET AL.; VAHLBERG V. OKLAHOMA; FRIEDMAN ET AL. V. UNITED STATES; BINION V. UNITED STATES; SUKOWSKI V. RAGEN, WARDEN; MAUGHS V. ROYSTER, SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE PRISON FARM; JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES; GOODMAN ET AL. V. MCMILLAN; HOURIHAN V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ET AL.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
SMITH; UNITED STATES V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; COUNTY OF MINERAL, NEVADA, V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL UNION NUMBER 406, ET AL. V. POSTMA, DOING BUSINESS AS HAROLD F. POSTMA GRAVEL CO., ET AL.; CALIFORNIA ELECTRIC POWER CO. V. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION ET AL.; VAHLBERG V. OKLAHOMA; FRIEDMAN ET AL. V. UNITED STATES; BINION V. UNITED STATES; SUKOWSKI V. RAGEN, WARDEN; MAUGHS V. ROYSTER, SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE PRISON FARM; JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES; GOODMAN ET AL. V. MCMILLAN; HOURIHAN V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ET AL.
345 U.S. 961
Supreme Court of the United States (1953)
Caution
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The United States v. Lester, 247 F.2d 496 (2d Cir. 1957)…On a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty, the burden is on the defendant to prove the grounds alleged. Friedman v. United States, 8 Cir., 200 F. 2d 690, 696, certiorari denied, 1958, 345 U.S. 926, 73 S.Ct. 784, 97 L.Ed. 1357, rehearing denied, 3953, 345 U.S. 961, 73 S.Ct. 937, 97 L.Ed. 1381. Here, the prosecutor flatly denied making any representations as to leniency and there is no contradictory evidence. We have only Lester’s conclusory allegation in an affidavit and his statement that he was told he “wou…
-
Bartlett v. United States, 354 F.2d 745 (8th Cir. 1966)…e set aside or disregarded on appeal unless clearly erroneous, with the burden of proof resting on appellant. Friedman v. United States, 200 F. 2d 690 (8 Cir. 1952) Cert. denied 1958, 345 U.S. 926, 73 S.Ct. 784, 97 L.Ed. 1357; Rehearing denied 1953, 345 U.S. 961, 73 S.Ct. 937, 97 L.Ed. 1381. Moreover, just because the Court may be moved to exercise its discretion in one area it does not follow that it must exercise it the same way or in the same vein in other areas. For it is clear that in determining a m…
-
Ezequial Frank Lopez Vasquez v. United States, 279 F.2d 34 (9th Cir. 1960)…ide a plea of guilty and the action of the court will not be disturbed unless there is an abuse of that discretion. Friedman v. United States, 8 Cir., 1952, 200 F. 2d 690, certiorari denied 345 U.S. 926, 73 S.Ct. 784, 97 L.Ed. 1357, rehearing denied 345 U.S. 961, 73 S.Ct. 937, 97 L.Ed. 1381; Hoyt v. United States, 10 Cir., 1958, 252 F. 2d 460, 461, 462; United States v. Nigro, 3 Cir., 1959, 262 F. 2d 783, 787. The refusal of the trial court to allow oral argument on the motion to vacate the plea of guilty,…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence