DALLAL

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• United States v. Zambrana, 841 F.2d 1320 (7th Cir. 1988)
  …s worded in the disjunctive, the government is required to establish the need for electronic surveillance by demonstrating one of the three alternatives listed above. See United States v. Steinberg, 525 F. 2d 1126, 1130 (2nd Cir.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 971, 96 S.Ct. 2167, 48 L.Ed.2d 794 (1976). The Supreme Court has noted that § 2518 was enacted in order “to make doubly sure that the statutory authority be used with restraint and only where circumstances warrant the surreptitious interception of wire…
• United States v. Egidio Cerilli, 603 F.2d 415 (3d Cir. 1979)
  …hat a person may violate the Hobbs Act without himself receiving the benefits of his coercive actions. See U. S. v. Green, 350 U.S. 415, 420, 76 S.Ct. 522, 100 L.Ed. 494 (1956), U. S. v. Trotta, 525 F. 2d 1096, 1098 n.2 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 971, 96 S.Ct. 2167, 48 L.Ed.2d 794 (1976); U. S. v. Provenzano, 334 F. 2d 678, 686 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 947, 85 S.Ct. 440, 13 L.Ed.2d 544 (1964). U. S. v. Trotta itself involved political contributions and the court there held that this fac…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• Lavin v. Marsh, 644 F.2d 1378 (9th Cir. 1981)
  …n to address this question in the past, and a review of the cases suggests that each turns on its own particular facts and circumstances. See, e. g., Santiago v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 526 F. 2d 488, 493 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 971, 96 S.Ct. 2167, 48 L.Ed.2d 794 (1976) (en banc immigration decision finding no estoppel, and recognizing that while the modifier “affirmative” suggests a distinction between nonfeasance and misfeasance, “these are slippery terms”); United States v.…