Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
United States v. Mellon
United States v. Mellon, 165 F.2d 80 (2d Cir. 1947)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1947-12-15
- Topic
- general
PER CURIAM. The appellant was convicted by verdict of a jury upon a charge that on February 20, 1940, he caused an appeal bond to be furnished on behalf of Michael Pecoraro, named as principal in the bond, and caused some person to forge the signature of “Charles D. Martineau” who was named as surety in the bond. “Charles D. Martineau” was a name used by George LaFante, and in that name LaFante held title to real estate jointly purchased by him and the appellant. LaFante testified that he had neither signed the bond nor authorized anyone to sign it.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Mellon. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 3 opinions
John Mellon was convicted of having caused an appeal bond to be furnished on behalf of one named as principal in the bond and caused some person to forge signature of one who was named as surety in the bond in violation of Criminal Code, § 28, 18 U.S.C.A. § 72, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
J. Vincent Keogh, U.S. Atty., of Brooklyn (Mario Pittoni, Asst. U.S. Atty., of Brooklyn, of counsel), for appellee.
It is urged that the conviction must be set aside because the confession is uncorroborated. Warszower v. United States,312 U.S. 342, 345, 61 S.Ct. 603, 85 L.Ed. 876; Daeche v. United States, 2 Cir., 250 F. 566, 571. But corroboration is found both in LaFante's denial that he signed or authorized anyone to sign the bond, and in the fact that the appellant was not jailed until February 13th and therefore had opportunity to arrange before that date to have the bond furnished thereafter, as his confession stated he had done. We think the corroboration sufficient. United States v. Kertess, 2 Cir.,139 F.2d 923, certiorari denied Kertess v. United States,321 U.S. 795, 64 S. Ct. 847, 88 L.Ed. 1084.
The judgment is affirmed.