From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. One Philco Television

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 18, 1971
443 F.2d 369 (5th Cir. 1971)

Opinion

No. 27101.

May 18, 1971.

James R. Gough, Asst. U.S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for plaintiff-appellant.

Ben Blum, Ted Bailey, Jr., Houston, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

Before BELL and THORNBERRY, Circuit Judges, and CHOATE, District Judge.


The question presented by this appeal is whether a statutory forfeiture proceeding brought pursuant to 26 U.S.C.A. § 7302 is constitutionally permissible after Marchetti v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889, and Grosso v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed.2d 906. The Supreme Court answered this question negatively in United States v. United States Coin and Currency, 1971, 401 U.S. 715, 91 S.Ct. 1041, 28 L.Ed.2d 434, (opinion announced April 5, 1971). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court, 292 F. Supp. 35, is affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. One Philco Television

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 18, 1971
443 F.2d 369 (5th Cir. 1971)
Case details for

United States v. One Philco Television

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ONE PHILCO TELEVISION…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 18, 1971

Citations

443 F.2d 369 (5th Cir. 1971)

Citing Cases

United States v. One Bally Sun Valley Pinball Mach.

A number of per curiam reversals speaking in broad language state categorically that the statutory forfeiture…

Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks Lodge #615 of Brainerd, Minnesota v. United States

"         Plaintiffs assert that their interpretation of Marchetti and Grosso is supported by several cases…