Joseph Anthony Butera v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Joseph Anthony Butera v. United States

455 F.2d 987, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10636

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 20, 1972·No. 71-2835·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed. 1 See Local Rule 21. 2

1

. In seeking relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 appellant claims (i) the District Court was without jurisdiction because the Government failed to prove that the deposits of the burglarized bank were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and (ii) the District Court erred in refusing to order a mistrial after a Government witness was unable to identify evidence introduced against the defendant.

2

. See NLRB v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F.2d 966.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed. 1 See Local Rule 21. 2

1

. In seeking relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 appellant claims (i) the District Court was without jurisdiction because the Government failed to prove that the deposits of the burglarized bank were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and (ii) the District Court erred in refusing to order a mistrial after a Government witness was unable to identify evidence introduced against the defendant.

2

. See NLRB v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F.2d 966.

Joseph Anthony Butera v. United States, 455 F.2d 987, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10636 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

455 F.2d 987 (Joseph Anthony Butera v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related