From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Vano

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 3, 1974
496 F.2d 1195 (5th Cir. 1974)

Opinion

No. 73-3098. Summary Calendar.

Rule 18, 5 Cir., see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409.

July 3, 1974.

Herbert Shafer, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.

John W. Stokes, U.S. Atty., William P. Gaffney, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia; Charles A. Moye, Jr., Judge.

Before BELL, SIMPSON and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.



Affirmed. See Local Rule 21. The certificate required by Rule 42(a), F.R. Crim.P., has now been filed. See prior order of this court appended hereto. The underlying evidentiary basis for the contempt adjudication in question is adequate and the record does not support the claim that the contempt process was used "to shackle cross-examination."

See NLRB v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 5 Cir. 1970, 430 F.2d 966.

APPENDIX

ORDER

April 22, 1974.

42 BY THE COURT: Appellant, an attorney, was adjudged in contempt on the basis of conduct occurring in the examination of a witness. The record is entirely adequate to support the contempt adjudication. However, the district judge failed to execute the certificate required by Rule (a), F.R.Crim.Procedure, relying instead on his statements in open court. The order adjudging appellant in contempt is vacated and the cause is remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of affording the district judge the opportunity to issue the necessary certificate. Jurisdiction is otherwise retained in this court pending either receipt of the certificate or advice from the district judge, within thirty days from the date hereof, that the certificate will not be forthcoming.


Summaries of

United States v. Vano

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 3, 1974
496 F.2d 1195 (5th Cir. 1974)
Case details for

United States v. Vano

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. ANTHONY FREDERICK VANO ET AL.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jul 3, 1974

Citations

496 F.2d 1195 (5th Cir. 1974)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Mathews

They may have been based upon both. Without the required Rule 42(a) certificate we cannot discern the court's…

U.S. v. Cohen

We remand to the district court to allow it to file the requisite fifteen contempt orders. See Marshall, 451…