United States v. Louis A. Ruggirello

Sixth Circuit

United States v. Louis A. Ruggirello

454 F.2d 725, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11828

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 14, 1972

Docket71-1551

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 454 F.2d 725 (United States v. Louis A. Ruggirello) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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. Louis A. Ruggirello, 454 F.2d 725, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11828 (6th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant brings this appeal to challenge his conviction under each count of a Three-Count Indictment alleging fraudulent understatement of income for three different years.

After indictment and before trial the Government filed a formal motion seeking an order requiring the appellant to show cause why he should not be compelled to “give samples of his handwriting in the form requested by said special attorney, for the Department of Justice.” The motion was supported by an affidavit which recited that the Government had in its possession documents, the authorship of which was material to the case pending against this appellant. After a formal hearing, at which appellant’s retained counsel conceded that the Court had the authority to require such samples of handwriting under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 (1967), the Trial Court entered an order requiring the appellant to give the handwriting samples. No objection was raised on the trial to the introduction of the handwriting samples in evidence.

Appellant now claims that the requirement that he give samples of his handwriting violated his Constitutional Rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. On the record in this case the Court finds no merit in this or any other claim of error sought to be presented on this appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant brings this appeal to challenge his conviction under each count of a Three-Count Indictment alleging fraudulent understatement of income for three different years.

After indictment and before trial the Government filed a formal motion seeking an order requiring the appellant to show cause why he should not be compelled to “give samples of his handwriting in the form requested by said special attorney, for the Department of Justice.” The motion was supported by an affidavit which recited that the Government had in its possession documents, the authorship of which was material to the case pending against this appellant. After a formal hearing, at which appellant’s retained counsel conceded that the Court had the authority to require such samples of handwriting under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 (1967), the Trial Court entered an order requiring the appellant to give the handwriting samples. No objection was raised on the trial to the introduction of the handwriting samples in evidence.

Appellant now claims that the requirement that he give samples of his handwriting violated his Constitutional Rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. On the record in this case the Court finds no merit in this or any other claim of error sought to be presented on this appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

454 F.2d 725, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-louis-a-ruggirello-ca6-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack