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. GRUNEWALD

June 6, 1958

UNITED STATES of America,
v.
Henry W. GRUNEWALD, Daniel A. Bolich and Max Halperin, Defendants



The opinion of the court was delivered by: HERLANDS

An examination of Exhibit 133 for identification (Grunewald's Grand Jury testimony of Nov. 16, 1953) discloses that Grunewald was fully and clearly advised of his Fifth Amendment privilege and that he voluntarily proceeded to answer all questions.

The record also shows beyond dispute (page 5 of Exhibit 133 for identification) that until Grunewald had the opportunity to consult his counsel, he was given the unqualified and unconditional privilege to decline to answer any question without stating any reason for his refusal.

 At pages 5-6 the following appears:

 'Mr. Newcomb: What I suggest you do is this: We go ahead this morning, as I have said, but we will give you this morning, until you have had a chance to consult your counsel, the privilege of just declining to answer any particular question without stating your grounds.

 'The Witness: Yes, sir.

 'Mr. Newcomb: Until you have talked to your attorney.

 'The Witness: Thank you, sir.

 'Mr. Newcomb: I assume Mr. Collins is your attorney.

 'The Witness: Yes, sir, he is.'

 An examination of the minutes indicates that, at no time, did Grunewald refuse to answer any questions, either on the ground of the Fifth Amendment privilege or on the ground that he desired to consult counsel.

 Assuming arguendo that there was a right to counsel before he entered the grand jury, there was a waiver of that right.

 Moreover, the Court is impressed by Mr. Newcomb's testimony (which the Court accepts completely as truthful) that after the formal session before the grand jury on November 16, 1953, Mr. Newcomb and his staff made arrangements for Grunewald to consult with his attorney, William H. Collins, Esq., of the Washington, D.C. bar. It appears that Grunewald then consulted with his attorney; and that on the next day, November 17, 1953, Grunewald continued to testify in the same manner as he had theretofore testified on November 16, 1953.

 Thus, there was a ratification by conduct of Grunewald's waiver of the supposititious right to counsel, which ratification took place after Grunewald had the opportunity to consult with counsel.

 It is a logical and reasonable inference that Grunewald informed his attorney of what had transpired on the morning of November 16, 1953. There is a significant absence of any statement, objection, protest, or ...


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.