United States v. Gaydos

Second Circuit

United States v. Gaydos

310 F.2d 883

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedNovember 29, 1962

DocketNo. 150, Docket 27588

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 310 F.2d 883 (United States v. Gaydos) 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. Gaydos, 310 F.2d 883 (2d Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The evidence was quite clear that defendant, while not a big operator, did accept bets on horse races from his associates to be placed with a “bookie”; and the verdict of conviction was therefore justified. The charge was exemplary; of course the judge was not obligated to charge in appellant’s requested language. The rulings on evidence to which exception was taken were well within the court’s discretion. The decision is affirmed in open court.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The evidence was quite clear that defendant, while not a big operator, did accept bets on horse races from his associates to be placed with a “bookie”; and the verdict of conviction was therefore justified. The charge was exemplary; of course the judge was not obligated to charge in appellant’s requested language. The rulings on evidence to which exception was taken were well within the court’s discretion. The decision is affirmed in open court.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

310 F.2d 883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gaydos-ca2-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack