Austin v. United States
| Decision Date | 06 April 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 8317.,8317. |
| Citation | 353 F.2d 512 |
| Parties | Elizabeth G. AUSTIN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, James E. Holshouser, United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, and HAYNSWORTH and BOREMAN, Circuit Judges.
It appearing to this Court that the Supreme Court of the United States, in Di Bella v. United States and United States v. Koenig, on March 19, 1962, 369 U.S. 121, 82 S.Ct. 654, 7 L.Ed.2d 614, held interlocutory and unappealable an order of a District Court entered in a proceeding commenced prior to indictment for the purpose of suppression of evidence; and
It further appearing to this Court, by reason of the subsequent decisions of the United States Supreme Court above mentioned, that it was without appellate jurisdiction to review the order of the District Court declining to enjoin presentation of evidence to a grand jury;
Now, therefore, it is here ordered that the mandate of this Court issued on December 22, 1961 be, and the same hereby is, recalled, the judgment entered on November 21, 1961 is set aside, and the appeal is dismissed because the order of the District Court is interlocutory in nature and not appealable in advance of final judgment. This order is not intended to indicate that the District Court may not, in its discretion, hear the application for injunction prior to indictment, nor do we hereby intimate any opinion upon the merits of said application.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Silbert v. United States
...of Fourth Amendment rights as in Smith v. Katzenbach, 122 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 351 F.2d 810, 815 n. 5 (D.C.Cir.1965); Austin v. United States, 353 F.2d 512 (4th Cir. 1962); In re Fried, 161 F.2d 453, 458-459 (2d Cir. 1947), and Lord v. Kelley, 223 F.Supp. 684 (D.Mass.1963), still either Salsbu......
-
U.S. v. Regional Consulting Services for Economic and Community Development, Inc.
...presentation of evidence to a grand jury, was interlocutory and not appealable in advance of final judgment. Austin v. United States, 353 F.2d 512 (4th Cir.1962) (per curiam).6 Appellants assert for the first time on appeal that they have been denied access to their property. Based upon the......
-
Church of Scientology of California v. U.S.
...to enjoin use of the evidence looking toward prosecution; it was tied to an incipient criminal proceeding (p. 742). Austin v. United States, 4 Cir., 1962, 353 F.2d 512, is similar to Smith v. United States, supra, and held, on the authority of DiBella, supra, that an order denying a petitio......
-
Parrish v. United States
...opposition, the District Court took jurisdiction of the action. In this it was relying upon our recognition, in Austin v. United States, 353 F.2d 512 (4 Cir. 1962), of such jurisdiction, albeit discretionary. In that decision we were, on word of DiBella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121, 82 S.......