Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

United States v. Mook

125 F.2d 706

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1942-02-06
Topic: general

PER CURIAM. Mook was convicted of violating the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., and. appealed. Thereafter he died; and his administratrix now seeks to revive the appeal. The authorities give us no alternative but to dismiss the appeal. 1 Nevertheless, we think it may not be amiss to say that it seems to us that the next-of-kin of a convicted person who dies pending an appeal have an interest in clearing his good name, which Congress might well believe would justify a change in the law. The appellant, Fleming, was convicted at the same time, but in his case sentence was suspended and he was put on probation for one day.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Mook. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 10 opinions

UNITED STATES v. MOOK,125 F.2d 706(2nd Cir. 1942)

UNITED STATES v. MOOK et al.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

February 6, 1942.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

Albert Mook and George Fleming were convicted of violating the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., and they appeal. On motion to dismiss the two appeals.

Appeals dismissed.

David Haar, of New York City, for appellants.

Joseph Brandwen, Asst. U.S. Atty., of New York City, for appellee.

Before L. HAND, CHASE, and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Mook was convicted of violating the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., and appealed. Thereafter he died; and his administratrix now seeks to revive the appeal. The authorities give us no alternative but to dismiss the appeal.¹Nevertheless, we think it may not be amiss to say that it seems to us that the next-of-kin of a convicted person who dies pending an appeal have an interest in clearing his good name, which Congress might well believe would justify a change in the law.

The appellant, Fleming, was convicted at the same time, but in his case sentence was suspended and he was put on probation for one day. His appeal also must be dismissed.²In United States v. La Shagway, 9 Cir.,95 F.2d 200, the appellant had been sentenced, but execution was suspended; therefore an appeal lay under Berman v. U.S.,302 U.S. 211, 58 S.Ct. 164, 82 L.Ed. 204. If Fleming wishes to review the judgment at bar, it is always possible for him to apply for sentence and suspension of execution.

Appeals dismissed.Page 707

United States v. Pomeroy, C.C., 152 F. 279; United States v. Dunne, 9 Cir., 173 F. 254, 19 Ann.Cas. 1145; Dyar v. United States, 5 Cir., 186 F. 614, 623; United States v. Theurer, 5 Cir., 213 F. 964, 967; Pino v. United States, 7 Cir., 278 F. 479; Rossi v. United States, 8 Cir., 21 F.2d 747. ↩
United States v. Lecato, 2 Cir.,29 F.2d 694; United States v. Levinson, 2 Cir.,54 F.2d 363; United States v. Knickerbocker Fur Coat Co., 2 Cir.,66 F.2d 388; Birnbaum v. United States, 4 Cir.,107 F.2d 885, 126 A.L.R. 1207; United States v. Albers, 2 Cir.,115 F.2d 833. ↩