United States v. Manarite, 434 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1970)

Case details
Bluebook Citation
United States v. Manarite, 434 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1970)
Full caption
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Samuel F. MANARITE, Appellant.
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided
Nov. 19, 1970
No. 331, Docket 35153.
Argued Nov. 19, 1970.
Decided Nov. 19, 1970.
H. Elliot Wales, New York City, for appellant.
Stephen H. Scott, Sp. Atty., U. S. Dept, of Justice (Jack Kaplan, Asst. U. S. Atty., of counsel; Whitney North Seymour, Jr., U. S. Atty., for S. D. N. Y., on the brief), for appellee.
Before KAUFMAN, HAYS and GIBBONS,* Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
We have affirmed in open court because we believe appellant’s challenge to the constitutionality of one of the statutes under which he was convicted, 18 U.S.C. § 894, forbidding “the use of any extortionate means * * * to collect or attempt to collect any extension of credit,” is foreclosed by our recent decisions in United States v. De Stefano, 2 Cir., 429 F.2d 344 (1970), and United States v. Perez, 2 Cir., 426 F.2d 1073, cert. granted, 400 U.S. 915, 91 S.Ct. 175, 27 L.Ed.2d 154 (1970). Moreover, we did not see any merit to his other contentions.
HAYS, Circuit Judge (concurring):
Having dissented in United States v. Perez, I consider myself bound by the result in that case and therefore concur in the present opinion.
*
Of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.
ProvenanceKnow exactly where this document came from.Members see the sourcing behind every authority on DocPost — so you can check the record yourself and cite with confidence.Request access