◆ SpookStack

numerous cases, including the following: (1) United States Supreme Court: Sorrells v. US, 287 US 435; Sherman v. US, 356 US 369; US v. Russell, 411 US 423; Hampton v. US, 425 US 484; (2) Second Circuit Court of Appeals: US v. Viviano, 437 F2d 295 (CA2), cert. denied 402 US 983 (1971); US ve Nunez-Rios, 622 F2d 1093 (CA2 1980); US v. Corcione, 592 F2d 111: (CA2 1979); US v. Archer, 486 F2d 670 (CA2 1973); US v. DeSapio, 435 F2d 272 (CA2 1970), cert. denied,402 | US 999 (1971); US v, Brown, 603 F2d 1073 (CA2 1979); (3) Cases from other circuits: US _v. Smith, 538 F2d 1359 (CAD 1976); US v. Quinn, 543 F2d 640 (CA8 1976); US v. Graves, 556 F2d 1319 (CAS 1977), cert. denied, 435 US 923. (1978); -US v. Leja, 563 F2d 244 (CA6 1977), cert. denied, 434 US 1074, 436 US 948 (1978); US_v. Johnson, 565 F2d 178 (CAL 1977), cert. denied, 434 US 1075 (1978); US v. Twigg, 588 F2d 373 (CA3 1978); US Vv. Szycher, 585 F2d 443 (CA 10 1978). Of all the foregoing cases, only one, the Third Circuit's decision in Twigg, has actually held that an | indictment should be dismissed under the supervisory power : or due process clause. because governmental conduct was. "outrageous", Although most of the other cases recognize the possibility of such a conclusion, none of them has held under the circumstances presented to the court that 1i/ dismissal of the indictment was an appropriate remedy.