ROBERTS
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1967-10-16
No. 330
Mr. Justice Black dissents., Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
389 U.S. 18 Supreme Court of the United States (1967) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 19 L. Ed. 2d 18 · 88 S. Ct. 1 · 1967 U.S. LEXIS 2962 · SCDB 1967-003
Cited by 28 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court vacated Robert's conviction and remanded his case to the District Court after the Government disclosed that FBI agents had monitored conversations between his co-defendant and the co-defendant's attorney following indictment. The Court held that Roberts was entitled to an evidentiary hearing to determine whether he was prejudiced by the monitoring, a relief the Court of Appeals had improperly denied, and directed the District Court to either reinstate the conviction or order a new trial based on its findings.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The petition for certiorari is granted. Petitioner’s conviction is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

In proceedings before the Court of Appeals pursuant to our previous remand, Levine v. United States, 383 U. S. 266, the Court of Appeals granted petitioner’s co-defendant Levine a new trial based upon a disclosure by the Government that, after the return of the indictment, agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation monitored conversations between Levine and Levine’s attorney. But the Court of Appeals denied petitioner’s motion for the same relief or, alternatively, for a remand to the District Court for an evidentiary hearing to deter mine whether he was prejudiced by the monitoring; the Court of Appeals stated, however, that the motion was denied “without prejudice to such application by him to the District Court as may be appropriate.” In the circumstances of this case, and in light of the acknowledgment of the Solicitor General in his brief in opposition that “the F. B. I. logs pertaining to the monitored conversations” are available, we think the Court of Appeals erred in denying petitioner’s alternative motion for an evidentiary hearing in the District Court. We therefore vacate petitioner’s conviction and remand to the District Court with direction to afford petitioner such an evidentiary hearing. Depending upon its findings, the District Court will either reinstate the conviction or order a new trial, as may be appropriate. See United States v. Wade, 388 U. S. 218, 242.

Vacated and remanded.

Mr. Justice Black dissents.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Harrell, 737 F.2d 971 (11th Cir. 1984)
    …be convicted as a principal for substantive offenses which were committed in furtherance of the conspiracy before he joined it or after he withdrew from it.” Gradsky v. United States, 376 F. 2d 993, 996 (5th Cir.), vacated in part on other grounds, 389 U.S. 18, 88 S.Ct. 1, 19 L.Ed.2d 18, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 908, 88 S.Ct. 224, 19 L.Ed.2d 224 (1967); see Levine v. United States, 383 U.S. 265, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 737 (1966); United States v. Knippenberg, 502 F. 2d 1056, 1059-60 (7th Cir.1974); United…
  • United States v. DiLAPI, 651 F.2d 140 (2d Cir. 1981)
    …t terminated this Court’s jurisdiction. Gradsky v. United States, 376 F. 2d 993 (5th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Grene v. United States, 389 U.S. 908, 88 S.Ct. 224, 19 L.Ed.2d 224, vacated in part on other grounds sub nom. Roberts v. United States, 389 U.S. 18, 88 S.Ct. 1, 19 L.Ed.2d 18 (1967); United States v. Eisner, 323 F. 2d 38, 42 (6th Cir. 1963). The filing of a petition for rehearing did not revest jurisdiction in this Court, as appellants apparently recognized by moving to stay the trial. Had this…
  • United States v. Gradsky, 434 F.2d 880 (5th Cir. 1970)
    …966). Subsequently, the Supreme Court vacated the sentence of appellant Roberts and remanded to the district court for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether his rights had been violated by the electronic surveillance. Roberts v. United States, 389 U.S. 18, 88 S.Ct. 1, 19 L.Ed. 2d 18 (1967). This court in a like manner ordered that the convictions of all the co-defendants involved in the conspiracy be set aside and that evidentiary hearings be held in the court below on the question of whether the ill…

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

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw