1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 490 F.2d
  5. 490 F.2d 799 (1974)
 

UNITED STATES v. VAGLICA

Nos. 73-1149, 73-1255, 73-1256 and 73-1588.

490 F.2d 799 (1974)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sam VAGLICA, Steve Guggino, Henry Trafficante, Berthold John Haas and Isabel Margaret Seeley, Defendants-Appellees. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alfonso SCAGLIONE, Wade Robert Westmoreland, Julius L. Richardson, Peter Richardson, Phyllis A. Moore, a/k/a Annie Moore, and Oliver Hurley, Defendants-Appellees. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luis Henry FIGUEREDO, Jr., Louis Henry Figueredo, Sr., Guy Stein, Sr., Omer Thomas Caron, Charline Albritton, James I. Black, Manuel Llano and A. T. Edwards, Defendants-Appellees. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Salvatore CASTELLANA, Joseph Carl Castellana, James Camilo Castellana, Helen Louise Hawkins and Thomas Henry Peterson, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 8, 1974.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John L. Briggs, U. S. Atty., Jacksonville, Fla., Claude H. Tison, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Tampa, Fla., for the United States.

John S. Matthews, Henry Gonzalez, Thomas J. Hanlon, Tampa, Fla., for Sam Vaglica and others.

Jack T. Edmund, Robert E. Pyle, Lake Alfred, Fla., for Alfonso Scaglione and others.

Barry Cohen, Paul Antinori, Jr., Raymond E. LaPorte, Richard A. Bokor, Henry Gonzalez, Tampa, Fla., Clinton A. Curtis, Kenneth L. Connor, Lake Wales, Fla., John D. Demmi, Tampa, Fla., J. Hardin Peterson, Lakeland, Fla., for Luis Henry Figueredo, Jr., and others.

Henry Gonzalez, Robert W. Knight, Tampa, Fla., for Salvatore Castellana and others.

Before THORNBERRY, SIMPSON and CLARK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In each of these appeals, which we consolidated for oral argument, the Government is challenging a district court's dismissal of an indictment count charging multiple defendants with conspiracy to conduct an illegal gambling enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1955. The district court dismissed the count in each case on the ground that it violated Wharton's Rule.1 We have reserved

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases