DAVIS
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1960-12-12
No. 456
364 U.S. 505 Supreme Court of the United States (1960) Negative Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of the entire record and the suggestion of the Solicitor General, the petition for writ of certiorari is granted limited to that part of the judgment concerned with Counts I, II, and III of the indictment, and that part of the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court for a new trial on Counts I, II, and III. In all other respects the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Davis v. United States, 311 F.2d 495 (7th Cir. 1963)
    …ial of petitioner’s motion to suppress. 281 F. 2d 93, 94-97. Thereafter, the Supreme Court granted certiorari as to the first three counts of the indictment and reversed the judgment. Certiorari as to Count Four — the one now before us — was denied. 364 U.S. 505, 81 S.Ct. 281, 5 L.Ed.2d 258 (1960). Citation of prior holdings of this and other Courts of Appeals seems unnecessary to support the proposition that matters that have been decided on direct appeal cannot be relitigated by a motion under Section 22…
  • United States v. Shelton Peterson, 424 F.2d 1357 (7th Cir. 1970)
    …reversed for want of proof that the sale made here was not in pursuance of a written order on the appropriate form issued for that purpose by the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate. Defendant relies primarily on Davis v. United States, 1960, 364 U.S. 505, 81 S.Ct. 281, 5 L.Ed.2d 258, wherein the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the judgment with respect to Counts I, II and III of the indictment. The decision of this Court in United States v. Davis, 1960, 281 F. 2d 93, had affirmed convict…
  • United States v. Bishop, 457 F.2d 260 (7th Cir. 1972)
    …te. But in this respect the defendant overlooks that it is not incumbent on the government to prove that the purchase was not made with a written order on the prescribed form. United States v. Davis, 7 Cir., 281 F. 2d 93, 97, rev’d on other grounds, 364 U.S. 505, 81 S.Ct. 281, 5 L.Ed.2d 258; United States v. Peterson, 7 Cir., 424 F. 2d 1357, 1363-1364; United States v. Palmiotto, 2 Cir., 347 F. 2d 223; United States v. Sabella, 2 Cir., 272 F. 2d 206, 211. In rejecting a somewhat similar argument in United S…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw