United States v. D'AMATO
| Decision Date | 20 July 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 18782,18783.,18782 |
| Citation | 429 F.2d 1284 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Charles A. D'AMATO et al. Appeal of Joseph D. D'AMATO, in No. 18782. Appeal of Joseph B. NANARTOWICZ, in No. 18783. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Thomas H. Henderson, Jr., Chevy Chase, Md. (Louis C. Bechtle, U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., Bruce A. Burns, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellee.
Edmund E. DePaul, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants.
Before BIGGS, STALEY and ADAMS, Circuit Judges.
Appellants D'Amato and Nanartowicz each pleaded nolo contendere to a charge of conspiracy to use the facilities of interstate commerce with intent to carry on unlawful gambling in violation of Section 1952, Title 18, U.S.C., to commit wire fraud in violation of Section 1343 of that title, and to cause the telephone company to extend facilities other than as specified in schedules filed with the Federal Communications Commission in violation of Sections 203(c) (3) and 501, Title 47, U.S.C. In addition, each pleaded nolo contendere to a charge of the substantive violation of Section 1952, as well as to a charge of aiding and abetting the commission of that crime contrary to Section 2, Title 18, U.S.C.
On October 27, 1969, the district judge suspended sentences on the conspiracy count and, on the respective substantive counts, fined each appellant $1,000 and imposed sentences of three years probation upon them. One of the conditions of the probations was that the appellants should "not engage in any gambling, book-making selling, betting,1 etc." A scant ten days later D'Amato and Nanartowicz were arrested together by the Philadelphia Police. The district judge held a probation revocation hearing on February 10, 1970, and, after receiving evidence, found that the appellants had violated the terms of their probations and sentenced each of them to 18 months imprisonment. These appeals followed.
The sole issue raised on these appeals is the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the revocation of the probations.
At the revocation hearing it was established that on November 7, 1969, a contingent of Philadelphia policemen, armed with a search warrant, arrived at the second floor apartment at 1601 South Taylor Street in Philadelphia, knocked on the door and announced their presence and purpose. After receiving no response and hearing "shuffling sounds" from within, Lieutenant DeCree broke through the rear kitchen door to the apartment. DeCree testified that upon breaking down the door he saw Nanartowicz putting papers into the sink under a running faucet and D'Amato retreating from the kitchen into a hallway. DeCree removed the elbow joint under the sink and retrieved from its interior a "glob" of paper, which he identified as soluble paper of a type commonly used by those engaged in illegal gambling enterprises. On a table in the kitchen were located two telephones, four sheets of soluble paper, several pens, and that day's edition of the National Armstrong Daily News Review, a racing news sheet. In the course of a subsequent search, three "racing sheets" and over $400 in cash were seized from an unlocked suitcase found in the bedroom. DeCree testified further that in the approximate half hour after their entry into the apartment the telephone rang about 15 times, two thirds of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. State
...seems to be the accepted procedure in other jurisdictions. e.g. Shaw v. Henderson, 430 F.2d 1116 (5th Cir. 1970); United States v. D'Amato, 429 F.2d 1284 (3rd Cir. 1970); United States v. Lauchli, 427 F.2d 258 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 868, 91 S.Ct. 111, 27 L.Ed.2d 108 (1970);......
-
HARRIS v. U.S.
...for the underlying offense. Id. at 477. In so doing, the court relied upon three federal courts of appeals cases: United States v. D'Amato, 429 F.2d 1284 (3d Cir. 1970); United States v. Carrion, 457 F.2d 808 (9th Cir. 1972); and United States v. Markovich, 348 F.2d 238 (2d Cir. 1965). In e......
-
State ex rel. Flowers v. Department of Health and Social Services
...Amaya v. Beto (5th Cir. 1970), 424 F.2d 363; United States v. Markovich (2nd Cir. 1965), 348 F.2d 238.4 See, e. g.: United States v. D'Amato (3rd Cir. 1970), 429 F.2d 1284; Standlee v. Smith, supra.5 See, e. g.: People v. Smith, 105 Ill.App.2d 14, 245 N.E.2d 13 (1969); State v. Fisher, 21 A......
-
United States v. Iannece, Crim. No. 73-647.
...judge need only be reasonably satisfied that the probationer has violated the terms of his conditional release. United States v. D'Amato, 429 F.2d 1284, 1286 (3d Cir. 1970). See United States v. Strada, 503 F.2d 1081, 1085 (8th Cir. 1974); United States v. Alarik, 439 F.2d 1349, 1351 (8th C......