United States v. Samuel F. Maniscalco, Jr., Steven Bertolino, Richard F. Murphy, Frank Musso, Guy Courtney, Walton Aucoin, and Joseph Carriles

527 F.2d 1344, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 12523
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 5, 1976
Docket74--4100
StatusPublished

This text of 527 F.2d 1344 (United States v. Samuel F. Maniscalco, Jr., Steven Bertolino, Richard F. Murphy, Frank Musso, Guy Courtney, Walton Aucoin, and Joseph Carriles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Samuel F. Maniscalco, Jr., Steven Bertolino, Richard F. Murphy, Frank Musso, Guy Courtney, Walton Aucoin, and Joseph Carriles, 527 F.2d 1344, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 12523 (5th Cir. 1976).

Opinion

527 F.2d 1344

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Samuel F. MANISCALCO, Jr., Steven Bertolino, Richard F.
Murphy, Frank Musso, Guy Courtney, Walton Aucoin,
and Joseph Carriles, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 74--4100.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

March 5, 1976.

Gerald J. Gallinghouse, U.S. Atty., New Orleans, La., Roy Beene, Sp. Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Thomas E. Rickhoff, Sp. Atty., New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Virgil M. Wheeler, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Maniscalco.

John E. Unsworth, Jr., New Orleans, La., for Courtney.

Michael O. Miranne, New Orleans, La., for Murphy.

Louis B. Merhige, New Orleans, La., for Aucoin.

Salvatore Panzeca, New Orleans, La., for Musso and Carriles.

F. Irvin Dymond, New Orleans, La., for Bertolino.

Before JONES, WISDOM and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This case and United States v. Ladd, 5th Cir. 1976, 527 F.2d 1341 (74--3757), and United States v. Alfonso et al., 5th Cir. 1976, 527 F.2d 1343 (74--3776), decided this day, are companion cases. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana suppressed wiretap evidence on the ground that the wiretap order of January 7, 1971, was insufficient on its face. The government appeals this ruling.

What was said in the Ladd case applies here. The court erred in suppressing the evidence. The judgment of the district court is reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

United States v. Joseph Ladd
527 F.2d 1341 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
527 F.2d 1344, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 12523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-samuel-f-maniscalco-jr-steven-bertolino-richard-f-ca5-1976.