Levine v. United States Roberts v. United States Grene v. United States Gradsky v. United States, No. 112

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation383 U.S. 265,15 L.Ed.2d 737,86 S.Ct. 925
PartiesGeorge LEVINE v. UNITED STATES. Robert B. ROBERTS v. UNITED STATES. Robert GRENE v. UNITED STATES. Norman GRADSKY v. UNITED STATES
Decision Date28 February 1966
Docket NumberNo. 234,No. 230,No. 125,No. 112

383 U.S. 265
86 S.Ct. 925
15 L.Ed.2d 737
George LEVINE

v.

UNITED STATES.

No. 112.
Robert B. ROBERTS
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 125.
Robert GRENE
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 230.
Norman GRADSKY
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 234.

Supreme Court of the United States

February 28, 1966

Nicholas J. Capuano, for petitioner Levine.

Thomas F. Call, for petitioner Roberts.

Joseph W. Wyatt, for petitioner Grene.

Sidney M. Dubbin and E. David Rosen, for petitioner Gradsky.

Solicitor General Marshall, former Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Daniel H. Benson, for the United States.

On Petitions for Writs of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

PER CURIAM.

Ten persons were found guilty by a jury on each count of a 10-count indictment. The count predicated on 18

Page 266

U.S.C. § 371 (1964 ed.) charged all defendants with conspiring to violate § 17 of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a) (1964 ed.), and the Mail Fraud Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (1964 ed.); each of the remaining nine counts charged all defendants with substantive offenses of violating these latter statutes. The Court of Appeals affirmed all the conspiracy convictions; and, with some exception for petitioner Roberts and two other defendants, that court also affirmed the convictions for the substantive offenses. 342 F.2d 147. Four defendants petitioned for writs of certiorari, and a fifth defendant subsequently moved to be added as a co-petitioner in one of the petitions already filed (No. 234). We grant that motion; and we grant the petitions for writs of certiorari limited to the issue whether petitioners were improperly convicted of substantive offenses committed by members of the conspiracy before petitioners had joined the conspiracy or after they had withdrawn from it. In all other respects the petitions are denied.

In response to specific questions addressed by this Court, the Solicitor General has made a two-pronged concession: First, he concedes that an individual cannot be held criminally liable for substantive offenses committed by members of the conspiracy before that individual had joined or after he had withdrawn from the conspiracy; and second, he concedes that in this case some of the convictions for the substantive offenses must be reversed because they are inconsistent with this principle.1 On the basis of this concession, and upon consideration of the entire record, we vacate...

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 practice notes
  • Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., No. 87-4804
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • March 1, 1990
    ...24(b). 62 See Gradsky v. United States, 342 F.2d 147, 152-53 (5th Cir.1965), vacated on other grounds sub nom. Levine v. United States, 383 U.S. 265, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 737 (1966); see also Moore v. South African Marine Corp., 469 F.2d 280, 281 (5th Cir.1972); Carey v. Lykes Bros. Ste......
  • U.S. v. Blackmon, Nos. 1182
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • February 9, 1988
    ...offenses, a defendant cannot be retroactively liable for offenses committed prior to his joining the conspiracy. Levine v. United States, 383 U.S. 265, 266, 86 S.Ct. 925, 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 737 (1966) (per curiam); United States v. Harrell, 737 F.2d 971, 981 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 ......
  • United States v. Black, No. 72-1906.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • June 15, 1973
    ...process at trial. Tehan v. United States ex rel. Shott, 382 U.S. 406, 86 S.Ct. 459, 15 L.Ed.2d 453, rehearing denied, 383 U.S. 931, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 850 480 F.2d 510 (1966). The classic enunciation of the policies behind the privilege against self-incrimination was set forth by Mr. ......
  • Grundstrom v. Beto, Civ. A. No. CA 3-1767.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Northern District of Texas
    • September 18, 1967
    ...1731, 14 L.Ed.2d 601 (1965) and Tehan v. United States ex rel. Shott, 382 U. S. 406, 86 S.Ct. 459, 15 L.Ed.2d 453, reh den, 383 U.S. 931, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L. Ed.2d 850 (1966), the Supreme Court strongly intimated that the true basis for the exclusionary rule is one of "general deterrence." ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
51 cases
  • Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., No. 87-4804
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • March 1, 1990
    ...24(b). 62 See Gradsky v. United States, 342 F.2d 147, 152-53 (5th Cir.1965), vacated on other grounds sub nom. Levine v. United States, 383 U.S. 265, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 737 (1966); see also Moore v. South African Marine Corp., 469 F.2d 280, 281 (5th Cir.1972); Carey v. Lykes Bros. Ste......
  • U.S. v. Blackmon, Nos. 1182
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • February 9, 1988
    ...offenses, a defendant cannot be retroactively liable for offenses committed prior to his joining the conspiracy. Levine v. United States, 383 U.S. 265, 266, 86 S.Ct. 925, 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 737 (1966) (per curiam); United States v. Harrell, 737 F.2d 971, 981 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 ......
  • United States v. Black, No. 72-1906.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • June 15, 1973
    ...process at trial. Tehan v. United States ex rel. Shott, 382 U.S. 406, 86 S.Ct. 459, 15 L.Ed.2d 453, rehearing denied, 383 U.S. 931, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L.Ed.2d 850 480 F.2d 510 (1966). The classic enunciation of the policies behind the privilege against self-incrimination was set forth by Mr. ......
  • Grundstrom v. Beto, Civ. A. No. CA 3-1767.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Northern District of Texas
    • September 18, 1967
    ...1731, 14 L.Ed.2d 601 (1965) and Tehan v. United States ex rel. Shott, 382 U. S. 406, 86 S.Ct. 459, 15 L.Ed.2d 453, reh den, 383 U.S. 931, 86 S.Ct. 925, 15 L. Ed.2d 850 (1966), the Supreme Court strongly intimated that the true basis for the exclusionary rule is one of "general deterrence." ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT