431 F.2d 704 (8th Cir. 1970), 20036, Alexander v. Zimpfer

Docket Nº:20036.
Citation:431 F.2d 704
Party Name:Ferris Jacob ALEXANDER and Edward Jacob Alexander, Appellants, v. Bernard G. ZIMPFER, United States Commissioner, District of Minnesota; Robert M. Morgenthau, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York; Robert Renner, United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, Appellees.
Case Date:September 21, 1970
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 704

431 F.2d 704 (8th Cir. 1970)

Ferris Jacob ALEXANDER and Edward Jacob Alexander, Appellants,

v.

Bernard G. ZIMPFER, United States Commissioner, District of Minnesota; Robert M. Morgenthau, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York; Robert Renner, United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, Appellees.

No. 20036.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Sept. 21, 1970

Herald Price Fahringer, Jr., Buffalo, N.Y., for appellants, and filed brief; Keith D. Kennedy, Minneapolis, Minn., was on the brief with Mr. Fahringer.

Philip B. Abramowitz, Buffalo, N.Y., on the brief.

J. Earl Cudd, Asst. U.S. Atty., Minneapolis, Minn., made argument for appellees. No brief was filed by counsel for appellees.

Before GIBSON and LAY, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

A Federal grand jury in the Southern District of New York indicted fifteen persons, including appellants, on charges of violating 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy to transport interstate obscene materials) and 18 U.S.C. § 1465 (interstate transportation of obscene materials). Appellants were arrested by the F.B.I. in Minneapolis, Minnesota on October 27, 1969 and the Government sought a warrant for removal of appellants to the Southern District of New York pursuant to Rule 40(b)(3), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

A hearing was had before the District of Minnesota Commissioner. At the conclusion of the hearing the Commissioner announced his intention to issue the warrant of removal. Appellants thereupon commenced the instant civil suit to enjoin the issuance of the warrant of removal; to obtain a three judge United States District Court to hear and declare the execution of the removal under Rule 40(b)(3) unconstitutional and a declaratory...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP