Martin Popper v. United States, 306 F.2d 290 (D.C. Cir. 1962). · Go Syfert
Search
Martin Popper v. United States, 306 F.2d 290 (D.C. Cir. 1962). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Martin POPPER, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
16445.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Jul 5, 1962.
306 F.2d 290
Mr. Leonard B. Boudin, New York City, for appellant. Mr. David Rein, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellant., Mr. Anthony G. Amsterdam, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs, David C. Acheson, U. S. Atty., Nathan J. Paul-son and William Hitz, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee. Messrs. Charles T. Duncan, Principal Asst. U. S. Atty., and John R. Schmertz, Asst. U. S. Atty., also entered appearances for ap-pellee.
Prettyman, Bastían, Burger.
Published
PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of criminal contempt of Congress, under 2 U.S.C. § 192, for refusal to answer certain questions of a subcommittee of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. A pre-trial motion to dismiss the indictment filed on behalf of appellant alleged inter alia that “the' indictment fails to set forth the question under inquiry * * This motion was denied and, at a subsequent trial before a jury, appellant was found guilty of the crime charged against him. From the judgment ana sentence entered against him by the District Court in conformity with the jury’s verdict, Popper appeals to this court, urging again, among other grounds, the insufficiency of the indictment.

Bound as we are by the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Russell v. United States and related cases, 369 U.S. 749, 779, 781, 82 S.Ct. 1038, 8 L.Ed.2d 240 we reverse the judgment of the District Court.

We do not pass on any other points raised by appellant.

Reversed.