United States v. Minkoff

Second Circuit

United States v. Minkoff

181 F.2d 538, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2647

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided April 20, 1950·No. 538·Published·Cited by 15 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants’ motion asks that we remand this case to the district court in order that they may there seek a new trial for newly discovered evidence. Under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. 1 we should only entertain such a motion in case the district court indicates, after a hearing, that it intends to grant a motion for a new trial.

1

. Rakes v. United States, 4 Cir., 163 F.2d 771; Dession, New Rules of Criminal Procedure, 56 Yale L.J. (1947) 197, 232; N. Y. Univ. School of Law Institute-Proceedings, Vol. VI, p. 208.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants’ motion asks that we remand this case to the district court in order that they may there seek a new trial for newly discovered evidence. Under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. 1 we should only entertain such a motion in case the district court indicates, after a hearing, that it intends to grant a motion for a new trial.

1

. Rakes v. United States, 4 Cir., 163 F.2d 771; Dession, New Rules of Criminal Procedure, 56 Yale L.J. (1947) 197, 232; N. Y. Univ. School of Law Institute-Proceedings, Vol. VI, p. 208.

United States v. Minkoff, 181 F.2d 538, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2647 (2d Cir. 1950).

Pincite

181 F.2d 538 (United States v. Minkoff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related