Cemonte v. United States, 7153.
| Decision Date | 16 April 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 7153.,7153. |
| Parties | CEMONTE v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Vincent F. McAuliffe, of Detroit, Mich., for appellant.
Fred R. Walker, of Detroit, Mich. (John C. Lehr, of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for the United States.
Before MOORMAN, SIMONS, and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.
Cemonte, James Rizzo, and Gaspare Lograsso were convicted of possessing counterfeit Federal Reserve notes with intent to sell them and defraud the United States government. Cemonte appeals, contending that the evidence was not sufficient to submit the question of his guilt to the jury.
Stolarski, an employee of the Secret Service, opened negotiations with Rizzo in August of 1934 for the purchase from him of counterfeit notes. Rizzo stated to Stolarski that he was considering entering into a project to counterfeit coins in another state and wanted to go there immediately, but that he would make arrangements for some one else to deliver the notes. Rizzo did not go away and recommenced negotiations with Stolarski which continued until September, when the latter, with Zudeck, an informer, went to Rizzo's home to complete the negotiations. Rizzo would not continue them unless he was shown the money he was to be paid. Thereupon Stolarski and Zudeck left to get the money. They returned about two hours later, and while in the act of consummating the deal the three of them were arrested with the counterfeit notes in their possession. Cemonte was sitting in an adjoining room with a revolver in his possession, talking to Rizzo's children, and was also arrested.
With the foregoing facts as a background, the government proved circumstances which it contends are sufficient to support an inference that appellant was Rizzo's accomplice in the possession and intended sale of the notes. One of them concerns a conversation between Rizzo and the appellant in the Moran Cafe, where the appellant was employed as a barkeeper. While Rizzo and Stolarski were discussing the sale of the notes they visited the café with Zudeck and ordered beer. Cemonte served them and, when he was doing so, Rizzo said to him: "Bill, these boys are all right, and you take care of them if I go away." Cemonte nodded his head indicating assent. Shortly after Stolarski and Zudeck left but Rizzo remained. The others are the finding of appellant with a revolver in his possession in the room adjoining that in which the sale was being consummated, and the fact that after he arrived at the house he opened the door into the room where Rizzo and the others were and Rizzo said to him: "It is all right, Bill, close the door."
We think a careful analysis of these circumstances does not justify an inference of appellant's guilt. There was no evidence to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bryan v. United States 13 8212 14, 1949
...of the evidence. Second Circuit: United States v. Bonanzi, 94 F.2d 570; Romano v. United States, 9 F.2d 522; Sixth Circuit: Cemonte v. United States, 89 F.2d 362; Ninth Circuit: Klee v. United States, 53 F.2d 58. Since the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure went into effect on March 21, 19......
-
ALBENZE v. United States, 8005-8009.
...evidence upon which to submit to the jury an issue as to the guilt of the appellants Martello, DeCara, and Traficani, Cemonte v. U. S., 6 Cir., 89 F.2d 362; Nibbelink v. U. S., 6 Cir., 66 F.2d 178, and it further appearing that no brief was filed in support of the appeals of Albenze and Bru......