HARTFORD

v.

WICK, STATE HOSPITAL DIRECTOR, ET AL.; MEDRANO V. UNITED STATES; KILLILEA ET AL. V. UNITED STATES; NICOL V. NATIONAL SAVINGS & TRUST CO.; HILDERBRAND V. UNITED STATES; BYARS V. UNITED STATES; BAYLESS V. UNITED STATES; SHORTER V. UNITED STATES; GENCO V. GENCO; HARDEN V. UNITED STATES; BENSINGER V. STEINER, WARDEN; DEFINO V. MCNAMARA, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL.; TAYLOR V. FLOETE, DIRECTOR, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Vincent v. United States, 337 F.2d 891 (8th Cir. 1964)
  …long as it was done prior to commencement of service. See also Kelley v. United States, 235 F. 2d 44 (4th Cir. 1956) and United States v. Byars, 290 F. 2d 515 (6th Cir. 1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 905, 82 S.Ct. 185, 7 L.Ed.2d 99 (1961), reh. denied 368 U.S. 872, 82 S.Ct. 65, 7 L.Ed.2d 73 (1961). Because the defendant had not been transferred from the court’s custody to a place of detention at the time his sentence under Count 1 was reduced and his sentence under Count 2 increased to a permissible duration…
• Stein v. United States, 313 F.2d 518 (9th Cir. 1962)
  …ert. denied 351 U.S. 953, 76 S.Ct. 845, 100 L.Ed. 1476; rehearing denied 352 U.S. 860, 77 S.Ct. 24, 1 L.Ed.2d 70 (1960); Medrano v. United States, 9 Cir., 1961, 285 F. 2d 23; cert. denied 366 U.S. 968, 81 S.Ct. 1931, 6 L.Ed.2d 1258; rehearing denied 368 U.S. 872, 82 S.Ct. 64, 7 L.Ed.2d 73 (1961); Williamson v. United States, 9 Cir., 1962, 310 F. 2d 192. In Steiner, the substantive counts, as well as the conspiracy count, charged the illegal importation of psittacine birds in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 545…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Bible v. United States, 314 F.2d 106 (9th Cir. 1963)
  …the court again instructed in regard to the limited purpose of the testimony.6 A parallel case arose in Medrano v. United States, 285 F. 2d 23 (9th Cir., [*110] 1960), certiorari denied 366 U.S. 968, 81 .S.Ct. 1931, 6 L.Ed.2d 1258, rehearing denied 368 U.S. 872, 82 S.Ct. 64, 7 L.Ed.2d 73. There the defendant was charged with unlawful sale of heroin, and the trial court admitted, for the purpose of showing intent, evidence of another narcotics transaction involving the same persons. This court said: “Such…