Police Blotter
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Electronic Surveillance, the Mafia and Individual Freedom Benjamin M
Louisiana Law Review Volume 42 | Number 4 Summer 1982 Electronic Surveillance, the Mafia and Individual Freedom Benjamin M. Shieber Louisiana State University Law Center Repository Citation Benjamin M. Shieber, Electronic Surveillance, the Mafia and Individual Freedom, 42 La. L. Rev. (1982) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol42/iss4/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE, THE MAFIA, AND INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM* Benjamin M. Shieber** I. INTRODUCTION The United States Constitution affects the ability of federal, state and local governments to combat criminal activity. Since the relevant constitutional provisions are in the form of broadly stated legal commands,' the constitutionality of specific law enforcement practices can only be determined when the courts, ultimately the Supreme Court of the United States, interpret these commands in cases in which they are challenged. As has long been recognized, the judicial role in the interpretation process is a creative one, for when conflicting policies compete for ac- ceptance, a court's interpretation will further one policy at the expense of another.' The court's policy preference can only be rational and respon- sible when it is based on "considerations of what is expedient for the community concerned."'3 This requires the court to know the communi- ty, determine how implementation of each competing policy would af- fect it, and choose the policy of greatest utility for that community.' Cases involving electronic surveillance' by law enforcement agen- * Copyright 1982, Benjamin M. -
Dexter Babin, II History 505 Winter 2018-2019
Dexter Babin, II History 505 Winter 2018-2019 The FBI’s Unsuccessful Investigations into the New Orleans Mafia, 1977-1989 At a time when the FBI was eliminating entire chains of command in East Coast Mafia families with numerous investigations, eventually culminating with sentencing the bosses of the infamous “Five Families” to 100 years each in prison, a structural RICO indictment of the New Orleans Mafia was never successful until after New Orleans Mafia boss Carlos Marcello’s death.1 Though the FBI’s 1981 BRILAB insurance kickback sting would send Marcello to prison, his conviction would later be thrown out by an appellate court in 1989; freeing Marcello after serving only 8 years of his 17 year sentence, which also included bribing a California federal judge in an unrelated matter.2 This would leave the FBI’s BRILAB sting the only successful FBI operation in a handful that targeted Marcello during the 70s and 80s. This paper will propose that the FBI’s lack of success when it came to Marcello at this time as threefold: a general lack of structural identity of the New Orleans Mafia, Marcello’s political connections, and the way Marcello handled his finances all shielded him from a major indictment. These three factors will be examined through three unsuccessful FBI investigations against Marcello, which occurred later in his criminal career: the abortive 1975 UNIRAC (Union Racketeering) 1 Selwyn Raab, Five Families: The Rise, Decline, and Resurgence of Americas Most Powerful Mafia Empires [New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2005], 329-331. 2 Steve Cannizaro, “81 BRILAB Convictions Overturned.” The Times Picayune, June 23, 1989. -
1981 Journal
OCTOBER TERM, 1981 Reference Index Contents: Page Statistics n General in Appeals in Arguments in Attorneys iv Briefs iv Certiorari v Costs vi Judgments, Mandates and Opinions vi Miscellaneous vni Original Cases vni Parties x Records x Rehearings xi Rules xi Stays and Bail xi Conclusion xi (i) II STATISTICS AS OF JULY 2, 1982 In Forma Paid Original Pauperis Total Cases Cases Number of cases on docket 22 2,935 2,354 5,311 Cases disposed of 6 2,390 2,037 4,433 Remaining on docket 16 545 317 878 Cases docketed during term: Paid cases 2,413 In forma pauperis cases 2,004 Original cases , 5 Total 4,422 Cases remaining from last term 889 Total cases on docket 5,311 Cases disposed of 4,433 Number remaining on docket 878 Petitions for certiorari granted: In paid cases 152 In in forma pauperis cases 7 Appeals granted: In paid cases 51 In in forma pauperis cases 0 Total cases granted plenary review 210 Cases argued during term 184 Number disposed of by full opinions *170 Number disposed of by per curiam opinions **10 Number set for reargument next term 4 Cases available for argument at beginning of term 102 Disposed of summarily after review was granted 8 Original cases set for argument 2 Cases reviewed and decided without oral argument 126 Total cases available for argument at start of next term ***126 Number of written opinions of the Court 141 Opinions per curiam in argued cases **9 Number of lawyers admitted to practice as of October 3, 1982: On written motion 4,077 On oral motion 1,002 Total 5,079 * Includes No. -
United States V. Scotto: Progression of a Waterfront Corruption Prosecution from Investigation Through Appeal Thomas J
Notre Dame Law Review Volume 57 | Issue 2 Article 6 1-1-1982 United States v. Scotto: Progression of a Waterfront Corruption Prosecution from Investigation through Appeal Thomas J. Salerno Tricia N. Salerno Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Thomas J. Salerno & Tricia N. Salerno, United States v. Scotto: Progression of a Waterfront Corruption Prosecution from Investigation through Appeal, 57 Notre Dame L. Rev. 364 (1982). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol57/iss2/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. United States v. Scotto: Progression of A Waterfront Corruption Prosecution From Investigation Through Appeal* I. Introduction Anthony M. Scotto, a man whom Governor Hugh Carey de- scribed as "trustworthy, energetic, intelligent, effective and edu- cated,"' was convicted in federal district court on November 15, 1979, on charges of racketeering, accepting unlawful labor payments, and income tax evasion. Both Scotto and his co-defendant, Anthony Anastasio, were ranking union officials in the International Long- shoremen's Association (I.L.A.), the powerful union representing American stevedores. Scotto and Anastasio specifically represented the Brooklyn longshoremen in New York. This note uses United States v. Scotto to examine the progression and ramifications of a complex waterfront corruption case. In partic- ular, the note examines the development of the Scotto case from inves- tigation through appeal, and the practical effect which the prosecution and conviction has had on waterfront corruption. -
13Th Annual Report
The Commission shall make an annual report to the Governor and legislature ... * * Excerpt from S.C.I. Low THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT of the STATE OF NEW JERSEY COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION to the GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE STATE OF NEW JERSEY COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION COMMISSIONERS Arthur S. lone, Choirman John J. Froncis, Jr. Henry S. Patterson, " Robert J. Del Tufo EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR James 1. O/Halloran Executive Ass?stont John O. Davies Counsel to the Commission Michael V. Coppola Robert E. Geisler James A. Hart, III Gerard P. Lynch 28 West State Street Trenton, New Jersey OB60B 609·292·6767 STATE OF NEW JERSEY COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION 28 West State Street Trenton, N. J. 08608 . Telephone (609) 292·6767 TO: The Governor and the Members of the Senate and the General Assembly of the State of New Jersey The New Jersey State Commission of Investigation is pleased to submit for the year 1981 its thirteenth annual report and recommendations pursuant to SeeM tion 10 of P.l. 1979, Chapter 254 (N;J.S.A. 52,9M-l0), the Act establishing the Commission of Investigation. Respectfully submitted, Arthur S. Lane, Chairman John J. Francis, Jr. Robert J. Oel Tufo Henry S. Patterson, II ,'" i.' TABLE OF CONTENTS Page The Commission I Origin and Scope ............................... 1 Members of the Commission ....................... .6 Organized Crime Program II . labor Relations Profiteering By Organized Crime in Housing Construction . .. 9 . I. General Introduction ........................ 9 II. Organized Crime in labor Relations .......... " 10 Part I-Gambino Crime Family Consultants/II Part 2-DeCavalcanteCrime Family Consultants/22 Transition to Current Practices/35 III. -
United States V. Clemente, 640 F.2D 1069
Page 1 640 F.2d 1069, 106 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2673, 7 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1318 (Cite as: 640 F.2d 1069) Affirmed. United States Court of Appeals, West Headnotes Second Circuit. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, [1] Extortion 164T 19 v. 164T Extortion Michael CLEMENTE, Tino Fiumara, Thomas 164Tk18 Federal Offenses Buzzanca, Vincent Colucci, Carol Gardner, Michael 164Tk19 k. In general. Most Cited Cases Copolla and Gerald Swanton, Defendants-Appellants. (Formerly 165k25.1, 165k25 Extortion and Threats) [FN*] “Extortion” as defined in Hobbs Act consists of use FN* Editor's Note : The opinion of the United of wrongful means to achieve a wrongful objective. 18 States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit in U.S.C.A. § 1951(b)(2). United States v. Chesher, published in the ad- [2] Extortion 164T 43 vance sheets at this citation (640 F.2d 1069), was withdrawn from bound volume at the re- 164T Extortion quest of the Court. 164Tk40 Trial 164Tk43 k. Instructions. Most Cited Cases Nos. 549 to 553, Dockets 80-1261, 80-1263, 80-1271, (Formerly 165k33 Extortion and Threats) 80-1273 and 80-1275. Instruction authorizing conviction of extortion in Argued Nov. 5, 1980. violation of Hobbs Act upon finding that defendant used Decided Feb. 26, 1981. fear of economic loss to obtain money from persons in Rehearing Denied April 14, 1981. New York and New Jersey waterfront businesses was Defendants were convicted in the United States legally sufficient. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1951. District Court for the Southern District of New York, [3] Criminal Law 110 1159.2(5) Leonard B. -
State of New Jersey Commission of Investigation
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. J ~l j U.S. Department of Justice 84962 National Institute of Justice ~ This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the .' . person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National InstitlJte of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by IIt New Jersey State Cow~ission of Investigation to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). FUrther reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis sion of the copyright owner. STATE OF NEW JERSEY COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION ~. '\ COMMISSIONERS Arthur S. Lane, Chairman John J. Francis, Jr. Henry S. Patterson, " Robert J. Del Tufo EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR James T. O'Halloran Executive Assistant John O. Davies \ Counsel to the Commission ;. I Robert E. Geisler Michael V. Cop po a Gerard P. Lynch James A. Hart, III ::..) 28 West State Street ,. .. ' Trenton, New Jersey 08608 609-292-6767 ,-- - ---------~ ~. I' .. '~"'''-''' 'iii.~.C ~-;::, "'-" ~.Y) \~----------------~/.... '-(;\.~----------. II THIRTEENTH '~':I q, .:-;,:::" .~ c; ANNUAL ~;y~ {~. REPORT" Co " ') :::. \1 • (; , /' (! .\~ o i'r '., !! /1 I~~- ',~ ... I o A I .,;' I f STATE·:OF NEW JERSEY ..,.'.- . .. ' ,·CO~ISSION OF INVESTIGATION " r! .. l"'-'~-'---'-- The Commission shall make an annual r'~port to the Governor and Le:gislatlJre ...* * Excerpt from S.C.I. Law ,\J I , 't ~..... .- .... , ; \\ THIRTEENTH .ANNUAL REPORT of the ,. I, STATE OF NEW JERSEY 'i COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION to the GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE ~ , .~ j TABLE OF CONTENTS Page The Commission I Origin and Scope ..............................