JEFFRIES

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (32 total)

• United States v. Roberts, 618 F.2d 530 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …dant is essential for the grant of an order of transfer under Rule 21 (because a defendant has a constitutional right to a trial in the district where the offense was committed) (United States v. Angiulo, 497 F. 2d 440, 441 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896, 95 S.Ct. 175, 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974); Original Committee Note to Fed.R.Crim.P. 21(a) and (b), Par. No. 3), there is nothing in writing in this record which would authorize a transfer under Rule 21(b). The only motion in the written record is under R…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States Steel Corp. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 595 F.2d 207 (5th Cir. 1979)
  …n has repeatedly been approved, for example, in cases involving government price controls, because of the market distortions caused by the announcement of future controls. See De Rieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F. 2d 1321, 1332 (TECA), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896, 95 S.Ct. 176, 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Nader v. Sawhill, 514 F. 2d 1064, 1068 (TECA 1975). The exception was also held applicable to regulations concerning gas stations, where temporary shortages and discriminatory practices were found to have depriv…
• United States v. Morris, 612 F.2d 483 (10th Cir. 1979)
  …ll the jury is also among the judge’s discretionary powers. This power is most helpful where, for instance, the jury has been confused by multiple parties or counts. See e. g., Amos v. United States, 496 F. 2d 1269, 1271-72 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896, 95 S.Ct. 174, 42 L.Ed.2d 140; Williams and Coleman v. United States, 136 U.S.App.D.C. 158, 162-163, 419 F. 2d 740, 744—45 (D.C.Cir.). In any case upon the appearance of any uncertainty or contingency in a jury’s verdict, it is the duty of the tria…

  ← 1 / 2 →