United States v. O'Brien

Second Circuit

United States v. O'Brien

555 F.2d 136

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 12, 1977

DocketNo. 1083, Docket 77-1069

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 555 F.2d 136 (United States v. O'Brien) 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. O'Brien, 555 F.2d 136 (2d Cir. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Michael T. O’Brien appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Judge, following entry of a plea of nolo contendere to charges of violating the federal wagering tax statutes, 26 U.S.C. § 4401 et seq., and 26 U.S.C. § 7203, by failing to pay the special occupational tax imposed under the statutes. Before appellant entered the plea, he moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the statutory scheme of Chapter 35 of the Internal Revenue Code compels disclosure of incriminating information in violation of the fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. O’Brien now appeals from the denial of this motion to dismiss the information on the basis of his facial challenge to the constitutionality of 26 U.S.C. § 4401 et seq.

An identical challenge was recently rejected by this court. United States v. Saha-di, 555 F.2d 23 (2 Cir. 1977). On the basis of the opinion in Sahadi, we affirm.

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

PER CURIAM:

Michael T. O’Brien appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Judge, following entry of a plea of nolo contendere to charges of violating the federal wagering tax statutes, 26 U.S.C. § 4401 et seq., and 26 U.S.C. § 7203, by failing to pay the special occupational tax imposed under the statutes. Before appellant entered the plea, he moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the statutory scheme of Chapter 35 of the Internal Revenue Code compels disclosure of incriminating information in violation of the fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. O’Brien now appeals from the denial of this motion to dismiss the information on the basis of his facial challenge to the constitutionality of 26 U.S.C. § 4401 et seq.

An identical challenge was recently rejected by this court. United States v. Saha-di, 555 F.2d 23 (2 Cir. 1977). On the basis of the opinion in Sahadi, we affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

555 F.2d 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-obrien-ca2-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack