From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Damiano

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 16, 1961
290 F.2d 817 (3d Cir. 1961)

Opinion

No. 13505.

Argued May 2, 1961.

Decided May 16, 1961.

Donald J. Goldberg, Philadelphia, Pa. (Garfield W. Levy, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Sullivan Cistone, Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa. (Walter E. Alessandroni, U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, STALEY and FORMAN, Circuit Judges.


The defendant was convicted for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472. He does not deny that he possessed and passed counterfeit one hundred dollar bills. He does deny that he knew they were counterfeit. Defendant went to a poker game in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and passed five counterfeit one hundred dollar bills and lent another to a friend of his. He went into the game with these counterfeit bills plus several other hundred dollar bills which he had in his wallet. He came out of the game with the genuine bills but the counterfeit bills were all gone. The jury, under a careful charge by the trial judge, concluded that the defendant did have knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the money by finding him guilty. While the case is not the strongest one in the world, we think that the recited facts plus others in the record were enough to justify the jury coming to that conclusion.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Damiano

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 16, 1961
290 F.2d 817 (3d Cir. 1961)
Case details for

United States v. Damiano

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America v. Samuel DAMIANO, Appellant

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: May 16, 1961

Citations

290 F.2d 817 (3d Cir. 1961)

Citing Cases

United States v. Ward Baking Company

See United States v. Rosenberg, 257 F.2d 760 (3rd Cir. 1958), aff'd. 360 U.S. 367, 79 S.Ct. 1231, 3 L.Ed.2d…

United States v. Galvin

In counterfeiting cases, the federal courts have consistently held that, where exclusive possession of the…