United States v. Albert Grossman

Second Circuit

United States v. Albert Grossman

315 F.2d 94, 11 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1991, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5832

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 19, 1963

Docket27957_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 315 F.2d 94 (United States v. Albert Grossman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Albert Grossman, 315 F.2d 94, 11 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1991, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5832 (2d Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in open court the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Me-Gohey, J. After a trial without a jury, the defendant was found guilty of engaging in wagering transactions without paying the special tax imposed by 26 U.S. C. § 4411 and of failing to register as required by 26 U.S.C. § 4412, and was sentenced to pay a fine totalling $2,000 and a penalty of $50. 26 U.S.C. §§ 7262, 7203, 7272. The defendant’s contentions of error at trial are without merit.

By order dated October 1, 1962, Judge McGohey denied the defendant’s motion for the return of money seized by Internal Revenue Service agents at the time of his arrest. The money having been seized and being subject to forfeiture under 26 U.S.C. § 7302, and having been administratively forfeited as prescribed by 26 U.S.C. § 7325, the motion for the return of the money was properly denied. 26 U.S.C. § 7327, 19 U.S.C. § 1618. See United States v. Heckinger, 163 F.2d 472 (2 Cir., 1947); United States v. One Pontiac Coupe, 298 F.2d 421 (7 Cir., 1962).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in open court the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Me-Gohey, J. After a trial without a jury, the defendant was found guilty of engaging in wagering transactions without paying the special tax imposed by 26 U.S. C. § 4411 and of failing to register as required by 26 U.S.C. § 4412, and was sentenced to pay a fine totalling $2,000 and a penalty of $50. 26 U.S.C. §§ 7262, 7203, 7272. The defendant’s contentions of error at trial are without merit.

By order dated October 1, 1962, Judge McGohey denied the defendant’s motion for the return of money seized by Internal Revenue Service agents at the time of his arrest. The money having been seized and being subject to forfeiture under 26 U.S.C. § 7302, and having been administratively forfeited as prescribed by 26 U.S.C. § 7325, the motion for the return of the money was properly denied. 26 U.S.C. § 7327, 19 U.S.C. § 1618. See United States v. Heckinger, 163 F.2d 472 (2 Cir., 1947); United States v. One Pontiac Coupe, 298 F.2d 421 (7 Cir., 1962).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

315 F.2d 94, 11 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1991, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-albert-grossman-ca2-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack