Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Chrzanowski

decided: August 28, 1974.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JOSEPH CHRZANOWSKI, ALEX CHRZANOWSKI JOSEPH CHRZANOWSKI, APPELLANT NO. 73-1591 ALEX CHRZANOWSKI, APPELLANT NO. 73-1592



D.C. Crim. No. 241-72. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY.

Rosenn and Hunter, Circuit Judges, and Hannum, District Judge. Hunter, Circuit Judge, concurring.

Author: Hannum

Opinion OF THE COURT

HANNUM, District Judge

Appellants, Joseph Chrzanowski and his brother Alex Chrzanowski, were convicted in the District Court for the District of New Jersey of (1) conspiracy to use extortionate means to collect extensions of credit (Count I), (2) using extortionate means to collect extensions of credit (Count II) and (3) using extortionate means to punish for non - payment of an extension of credit (Count III), all in violation of 18 U.S.C. ยง 894.*fn1 Both defendants were sentenced to ten years imprisonment on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.

The main witness for the Government was one, James Jelicks. Jelicks testified that he had taken a $400 loan from the Chrzanowski brothers, paid it back several times over, suffered several beatings at their hands for non-payment, and yet was still in debt to them. After an alleged brutal beating on December 11, 1971, Jelicks went to the police.

The defense attempted to establish that the beatings had never occurred, that in fact Jelicks had been intoxicated on December 11, 1971, and that the injuries received on that date were self-inflicted. In addition, two defense witnesses testified to the good character of the appellants.

Appellants urge that the trial court committed five specific errors:

1 -- in permitting certain rebuttal testimony;

2 -- in failing to grant a mistrial when the jury glimpsed the defendant in handcuffs and in the custody of a United States Marshal;

3 -- in failing to include an entrapment instruction in the charge to the jury;

4 -- in refusing to read lengthy portions of the transcript to the jury when the jury so requested during its deliberations, and

5 -- in failing to include an instruction on immunity or inducement to testify in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.