Sam (Salvatore) Dipiazza v. United States, William Clyde Deming v. United States (1969)

Accord: DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 105 (6th Cir. 1969); United States v. Gosser, 339 F.2d 102, 111 (6th Cir. 1964). 26 This case, however, is not one where hearsay statements were involved.

There is no suggestion that these records represent anything other than records normally kept in the ordinary course of business on all customers' phones."); DiPiazza v. United States , 415 F.2d 99 , 103-04 (6th Cir. 1969) ("[O]ne who uses a telephone to make long distance calls is not entitled to assume that the telephone company will require a warrant before submitting its records in response to an IRS summons.").

The Service need not demonstrate probable cause to suspect inaccuracies, United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 51 , 85 S. Ct. 248 , 13 L.Ed.2d 112 (1964), nor need it specifically name in the summons the persons whose returns it wishes to examine, DiPazza v. United States, 415 F. 2d 99, 103 (6th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 949 , 91 S.Ct. 1606 , 29 L.Ed.2d 119 (1971), Tillotson v. Boughner, 225 F.Supp. 45, 46 (N.D.Ill.1963), aff’d, 333 F.2d 515 (7th Cir.), cert. denied…

Sec. 294 (c) (1970) 1 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) 2 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969) 3 142 U.S.App.D.C. 118 , 439 F.2d 628 (1971) 4 415 F.2d 99, 105 (1969) 5 393 U.S. at 414 , 89 S.Ct. at 588 6 393 U.S. at 431 , 89 S.Ct. at 596 7 Id 8 403 U.S. 573 , 91 S.Ct. 2075 , 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971) 9 290 U.S. 41 , 54 S.Ct. 11 , 78 L.Ed. 159 (1933) 10 403 U.S. at 582 , 91 S.Ct. at 2081 11 Brinegar, supra, at 175 , 69 S.Ct. at 1310 12 403 U.S. a…

Further, that where small packages are mentioned, that they contained numbers slips and related records used, or to be used in the operation of this lottery and that premises’ 3416— Eads Street N.E. and 721 — 46th Street S.E., both in Washington, D.C. are now being used as a numbers counting house or office for the purpose of processing the bet slips and handling the accounting procedures, and that there is now concealed in these premises, numbers slips and records and relat…

Co., supra, 415 F.2d 1284, 1286 (6th Cir.); DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 103 (6th Cir.); United States v. DeGrosa, 405 F.2d 926, 928 (3rd Cir.); Lash v. Nighosian, 273 F.2d 185, 188 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 904 , 80 S.Ct. 610 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 .

This Court in DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 103 (6th Cir.) held that : “Where the investigation may produce both civil and criminal evidence, the summons under section 7602 is a proper device for obtaining records.

A negative answer to this question is required by the authorities. 9 In United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48 , 85 S.Ct. 248 , 13 L.Ed.2d 112 , the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a 7602 summons requiring the addressee to appear before a special agent of the Internal Revenue Service. 10 This Court is DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 103 (6th Cir.) held that: 11 'Where the investigation may produce both civil and criminal evidence, the summons under section 7602 is…

Weak, anonymous and even untrustworthy information may serve as the opening clue to uncovering criminal acts... ." DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 105 (6th Cir.1969).

F42542698A; that a deputy sheriff observed the defendant give a $20 Federal Reserve note to the manager of a store in payment of a purchase; that such deputy upon examination found that a $20 Federal Reserve note in the possession of such manager corresponded in series and serial number with the aforenumbered bill of currency recorded as “bait money” stolen in the aforementioned robbery; that the moving defendant had possessed four bills of the proceeds of earlier bank robbe…

Nolan v. United States, 423 F.2d 1031, 1043-1045 (10th Cir. 1969); DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 101-102 (6th Cir. 1969), cert. denied 402 U.S. 949 , 91 S.Ct. 1606 , 29 L.Ed.2d 119 (1971); United States v. Covello, 410 F.2d at 541 ; Hanna v. United States, 404 F.2d 405, 408 (5th Cir. 1968).

See United States v. Hanon , 428 F.2d 101 (C.A. 8, 1970), certiorari denied 402 U.S. 952 ; United States v. Tiktin , 427 F.2d 1027 (C.A. 6, 1970), certiorari denied 402 U.S. 950 ; Rainey v. United States , 423 F.2d 628 (C.A. 2, 1970); DiPiazza v. United States , 415 F.2d 99 *114 (C.A. 6, 1969), certiorari denied 402 U.S. 949 ; and State v. Sellaro , 448 S.W.2d 595 ( Mo.S.Ct. 1969) .

See United States v. Powell, supra at 58 , 85 S.Ct. 248 ; United States v. Nunnally, 278 F.Supp. 843 (D.C.Tenn.) DiPiazza v. United States, C.A.6th (1969), 415 F.2d 99, 103 [2], Further, it was held by District Judge Real that, •X- * -X -X ■» X All criminal tax investigations to be prosecutable require the “proper civil purpose” of determination of tax liability.

See also DiPiazza v. United States, 6 Cir., 1969, 415 F.2d 99, 104-106 .

Compare DiPiazza v. United States, 6 Cir., 1969, 415 F.2d 99 ; see also Nolan v. United States, 10 Cir., 1969, 423 F.2d 1031 ; Bubis v. United States, 9 Cir., 1967, 384 F.2d 643 ; United States v. Baxter, 9 Cir., 1973, 492 F.2d 150, 165-168 . 4.

Compare DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 107 (6 Cir. 1969) citing Washington v. United States, supra, where Judge Phillips declined to exclude evidence seized pursuant to warrants which were proper authority for the searches at the time they were issued and executed.

See also DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99, 105 (6th Cir. 1969); United States v. Nicholson, 303 F.2d 330 (6th Cir. 1962).

See Di-Piazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99 (6th Cir. 1969); United States v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 415 F.2d 1284 (6th Cir. 1969); Wild v. United States, 362 F.2d 206 (9th Cir. 1966).

See e. g., DiPiazza v. United States, 415 F.2d 99 (6 Cir. 1969); United States v. King, 335 F.Supp. 523 (S.D.Cal.1971); United States v. Eusso, 250 F.Supp. 55 (E.D.Pa.1966); Cf., United States v. Focarile, 340 F.Supp. 1033 (D.Md.1972).