RAO

v.

UNITED STATES; HART V. HEDRICK, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY; MIZNER V. MIZNER; UNITED STATES V. AN ARTICLE OF DRUG . . . BACTO-UNIDISK . . . ; GRAHAM V. GREENE, JUDGE, ET AL.; VARONE V. VARONE; BURNS V. UNITED STATES; FORD V. UNITED STATES; STEINHARDT V. FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Sweig, 441 F.2d 114 (2d Cir. 1971)
  …motive to lie, and from other facts tending to show that the defendant really knew the things he claimed not to know. See United States v. Rao, 394 F. 2d 354, 356-357 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 845, 89 S.Ct. 129, 21 L.Ed.2d 116, reh. denied, 393 U.S. 972, 89 S.Ct. 390, 21 L.Ed.2d 386 (1968); United States v. Jones, 374 F. 2d 414, 419 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 835, 88 S.Ct. 40, 19 L.Ed.2d 95 (1967); United States v. Bergman, 354 F. 2d 931, 934 (2d Cir. 1966); United States v. Marchisio, 344 F…
• United States ex rel. Herbert Bros. v. Rundle, 414 F.2d 244 (3d Cir. 1969)
  …least as strong (see p. 117 of 245 A. 2d) as that contained in this supplemental charge was used (395 U.S. 960, 89 S.Ct. 2102); Cf. Rao v. United States, 394 F. 2d 354 (2nd Cir.), cert. den. 393 U.S. 845, 89 S.Ct. 129, 21 L.Ed.2d 116, rehearing den. 393 U.S. 972, 89 S.Ct. 390, 21 L.Ed.2d 386 (1968). The September 10, 1968, order of the District Court will be affirmed. . See Tomoya Kawakita v. United States, 190 F. 2d 506, 522-528 (9th Cir. 1951), and statement at 343 U.S. 744, 72 S.Ct. 950 that “other all…