Alexander Bisno v. United States

Appellant, hereafter referred to as Bisno, was indicted on a single count of knowingly and fraudulently concealing from a trustee in bankruptcy property belonging to a bankrupt estate in violation of Title 18 U.S.C.A. Section 152 . This section provides, in pertinent part:

The indictment arose out of bankruptcy proceedings against Bisno which were commenced upon the filing of an in *714 voluntary bankruptcy petition against him on April 5,1956, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Central Division. Bisno was adjudicated a bankrupt on April 26, 1956. On May 28, 1956, a trustee was appointed. On June 4, 1956, Bisno filed a Schedule and a Statement of Affairs purporting to list all his assets and liabilities. A Supplemental Statement of Affairs was filed in September, 1957. The indictment lists ten specific items of property allegedly belonging to his bankrupt estate which Bisno allegedly knowingly and fraudulently concealed from the trustee of said estate. Responsive to Bisno’s demand, the Government filed a Bill of Particulars more specifically describing and elaborating on the ten specific items of property alleged in the indictment to have…

(concurring).

My only question concerning the majority opinion has to do with the husband-wife privilege question.

Two of the ten specific items of property allegedly concealed were a note of the Exeter Hotel in the sum of $2,000 dated December 20,1955, payable to Sally Bisno, and a cashier’s check in the sum of $2,500, dated December 29, 1955, drawn on the Bank of America, Beverly Drive and Wilshire Branch, payable to “A1 Bis-no or Sally Bisno.” Referring to these items in his rebuttal argument to the jury, counsel for the Government said:

In an effort to offset this remark, counsel for appellant then proposed the following jury instruction:

The trial court refused to give this instruction and appellant argues that this was error. The majority opinion expresses the view that the court did not err in this regard.

I respectfully disagree. Appellant’s privilege not to permit his wife to be called against him as a witness, and possibly his privilege against her disclosure of husband-wife communications were involved here despite the fact that the prosecution did not seek to'call her as a witness. This is true for the reason that appellant could not call her as a witness in his…

299 F.2d 711 Alexander BISNO, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 17239. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. November 21, 1961. Rehearing Denied January 31, 1962. COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED Ronald E. Landers and Harvey R. Gerber, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. Francis C. Whelan, U. S., Atty., Thomas R. Sheridan, Asst. U. S. Atty., Chief, Criminal Division, Robert E. Hinerfeld, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before BARNES, HAMLEY and JERTBERG, Circuit Judges. JERTBERG, Circuit Judge. 1 Appellant, hereafter referred to as Bisno, was indicted on a single count of knowingly and fraudulently concealing from a trustee in bankruptcy property belonging to a bankrupt estate in violation of Title 18 U.S.C.A. Section 152 . This section provides, in pertinent part: 2 Whoever knowingly and fraudulently conceals from the trustee charged with the control or custody of property in any bankruptcy proceeding, any property belonging to the estate of a bankrupt shall be fined or imprisoned or both. 3 The indictment arose out of bankruptcy proceedings against Bisno which were commenced upon the filing of an involuntary bankruptcy petition against him on April 5, 1956,…