WILLIAMS ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Fioravanti, 412 F.2d 407 (3d Cir. 1969)
  ….D.N.Y.1967). 2 Orfield, Criminal Procedure Under the Federal Rules, § 16:13, 1968 Pocket Supp., “Discovery of a defendant’s statements under the amended rule is discretionary.” . Gevinson v. United States, 358 F. 2d 761 (5 Cir. 1966), cert. denied 385 U.S. 823, 87 S.Ct. 51, 17 L.Ed.2d 60 (1966); United States v. Kelley, 254 F.Supp. 9 (S.D.N.Y.1966). . Hemphill v. United States, 392 F. 2d 45, 48 (8 Cir. 1968). . See Wyatt v. United States, 388 F. 2d 395 (10 Cir. 1968); United States v. Kelley, supra, not…
• United States v. Berrigan, 482 F.2d 171 (3d Cir. 1973)
  …), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 930, 90 S.Ct. 265, 24 L.Ed.2d 228 (1969)].” 347 F.Supp. at 929. On appeal, the standard of review is whether the district court abused its discretion. Gevinson v. United States, 358 F. 2d 761, 766 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 823, 87 S.Ct. 51, 17 L.Ed.2d 60 (1966). It is well established that the executive branch is privileged not to disclose intra-governmental documents reflecting advisory opinion, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which gove…
• United States v. Cyrus T. Anderson, 509 F.2d 312 (D.C. Cir. 1974)
  …App.D.C. 3, 5, 420 F. 2d 253, 255 (1969). Similarly, an application for relief under Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(g) is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. E. g., Gevinson v. United States, 358 F. 2d 761, 766 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 823, 87 S.Ct. 51, 17 L.Ed.2d 60 (1966). . Ungar v. Sarafite, supra note 78, 376 U.S. at 589, 84 S.Ct. at 850. See also Nilva v. United States, 352 U.S. 385, 395, 77 S.Ct. 431, 1 L.Ed.2d 415 (1957); United States v. Ray, 351 F. 2d 554, 555 (4th Cir. 196…