359 F.2d 807 (7th Cir. 1966), 15256, United States v. Bruni

Docket Nº:15256.
Citation:359 F.2d 807
Party Name:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Giulio BRUNI, Defendant-Appellant.
Case Date:April 20, 1966
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 807

359 F.2d 807 (7th Cir. 1966)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Giulio BRUNI, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15256.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

April 20, 1966

Rehearing Denied May 17, 1966.

Joseph I. Bulger, Chicago, Ill., for appellant.

Edward V. Hanrahan, U.S. Atty., John peter Lulinski, John Powers Crowley, Lawrence E. Morrissey, Asst. U.S. Attys., Chicago, Ill., Lawrence Jay Weiner, Erwin I. Katz, Asst. U.S. Attys., of counsel, for appellee.

Before DUFFY, CASTLE and KILEY, Circuit Judges.

DUFFY, Circuit Judge.

The indictment in this case contained four counts. Count 1 charged defendant and others with conspiring from July to September 1964, to make, forge and counterfeit with intent to defraud, $3,000,000 in $5 and $10 currency of the United States, in violation of Title 18, U.S.C. 471. This count alleged certain overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, including the purchase of a certain type of paper, and a printing press.

Count 2 charged that on or about August 3, 1964, defendant and others were unlawfully in possession of metal printing plates which bore the impression of $5 and $10 United States currency, in violation of Title 18, U.S.C. § 474.

Page 808

Count 3 charged defendant and certain co-defendants and co-conspirators with unlawfully conspiring to pass forged and counterfeit obligations of the United States with intent to defraud in violation of Title 18, U.S.C. § 472.

Count 4 charged defendant with having possessed and concealed counterfeit $20 Federal Reserve notes at his residence in River Forest, Illinois, in violation of Title 18, U.S.C. § 472.

Defendant waived trial by jury. A plea of double jeopardy on behalf of Giulio Bruni was filed, argued and overruled. At the close of all of the evidence, motions of acquittal were filed by defendants Giulio Bruni and Fulvio Smaldone. Smaldone's motion was granted and he was found not guilty. Bruni's motion was denied and he was found guilty as charged in the indictment.

In connection with the plea and arguments claiming double jeopardy, frequent mention is made of the 'Milwaukee Case' wherein defendant Giulio Bruni and others were indicted and tried in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Count 1 of the indictment in the Milwaukee Case charged Bruni with having conspired to violate Title 18, U.S.C. §...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP