From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Manarite

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Nov 19, 1970
434 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1970)

Opinion

No. 331, Docket 35153.

Argued November 19, 1970.

Decided November 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.

Of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.


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.


Having dissented in United States v. Perez, I consider myself bound by the result in that case and therefore concur in the present opinion.


Summaries of

United States v. Manarite

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Nov 19, 1970
434 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1970)
Case details for

United States v. Manarite

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Samuel F. MANARITE, Appellant

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Nov 19, 1970

Citations

434 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1970)

Citing Cases

United States v. Natale

Usurious loans are illegal under New York law, N.Y. Penal Law § 190.40 (McKinney 1975), and usurious…