Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ds were tried under a six-count indictment alleging a variety of federal gambling offenses. Each of the eight petitioners, along with seven unindicted coconspirators and six codefendants, was charged, inter alia, with conspiring to violate and violating 18 U.S.C. 1955, a federal gambling statute making it a crime for five or more persons to conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own a gambling business prohibited by state law. Ds were convicted of both offenses, and each was sentenced under both the substantive and conspiracy counts. Iannelli (D) was additionally convicted of mailing gambling paraphernalia, 18 U.S.C. 1302, and using a fictitious name for the purpose of conducting unlawful bookmaking activities by means of the Postal Service. 18 U.S.C. 1342. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed, finding that a recognized exception to Wharton's Rule permitted prosecution and punishment for both offenses. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the conflicts caused by the federal courts' disparate approaches to the application of Wharton's Rule to conspiracies to violate 1955.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.