United States v. Santiage Defillo

277 F.2d 162
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedMarch 17, 1960
Docket25950_1
StatusPublished

This text of 277 F.2d 162 (United States v. Santiage Defillo) 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. Santiage Defillo, 277 F.2d 162 (2d Cir. 1960).

Opinion

277 F.2d 162

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Santiage DEFILLO, Appellant.

No. 256, Docket 25950.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued March 11, 1960.
Decided March 17, 1960.

David Klingsberg, Asst. U.S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City (S. Hazard Gillespie, Jr., U.S. Atty., and Louis T. Gallo, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for appellee.

Before CLARK, WATERMAN, and LEWIS,1 Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the opinion of District Judge Kaufman, June 30, 1959, 182 F.Supp. 782.

1

Of the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation

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

Related

United States v. De Fillo
182 F. Supp. 782 (S.D. New York, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
277 F.2d 162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-santiage-defillo-ca2-1960.