Voci v. Storb, 11874.
| Decision Date | 13 June 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 11874.,11874. |
| Parties | Tony VOCI, Appellant, v. William C. STORB, Al Farkas and Frank Matt. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Benjamin R. Donolow, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
William J. Woolston, Philadelphia, Pa. (Julian E. Goldberg, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), amici curiae for American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Philadelphia Branch.
William C. Storb, Lancaster, Pa., for appellees.
Before GOODRICH, KALODNER and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from the dismissal of the plaintiff's petition for an injunction. The plaintiff sought to enjoin the defendants, two police officers and the commonwealth's attorney, "from using as evidence any testimony * * * concerning the alleged telephone conversations of complainant in any proceedings now pending or which may hereafter be brought against complainant * * *" and an order directing the defendants "to suppress all evidence based on wire tapped telephone conversations * * *" It will be noted that both prayers for relief are directed to the use of the alleged information or testimony gained by wire tapping in court proceedings against the plaintiff. He says that his rights are given by the Federal Communications Act, § 605, 47 U.S.C.A. § 605.
We are unable to see any distinction between the problem of the propriety of federal intervention at this stage presented in this case and that in Stefanelli v. Minard, 3 Cir., 1950, 184 F.2d 575, affirmed with the opinion by Mr. Justice Frankfurter in 1951, 342 U.S. 117, 72 S.Ct. 118, 96 L.Ed. 138.
The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pugach v. Dollinger
...two cases a federal court should not intervene in criminal prosecution by a state for violation of its criminal laws. See Voci v. Storb, 3 Cir., 1956, 235 F.2d 48. Both Congress and the Supreme Court have often indicated their concern for the preservation of the balance between the states' ......
-
Pugach v. Sullivan
...414; Hoffman v. O'Brien, D.C., 88 F.Supp. 490. But see Burack v. State Liquor Authority, D.C.E.D.N.Y., 160 F. Supp. 161. 12 Voci v. Storb, 3 Cir., 235 F.2d 48. 13 344 U.S. at page 201, 73 S.Ct. at page ...
-
Voci v. Farkas
...of this court in January 1956 and this order was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on June 13, 1956, Voci v. Storb, 235 F.2d 48. D. The complaint in the action now before the court, filed June 20, 1956, is based on the identical facts involved in the complaint f......
-
People v. Naples
...the injunction-through-Federal-court method, ruled upon broadly in Stefanelli, supra, was particularized to wiretap evidence . Voci v. Storb et al., 235 F.2d 48, decided June 13, 1956, presented to the United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit the question of restraining two state ......