United States of America, Appellee, v. Anthony Salerno, A/k/a "fat Tony", Vincent Di Napoli, A/k/a"vinnie", Louis Di Napoli, A/k/a "louie", Matthew Ianniello,a/k/a "matty the Horse", John Tronolone, A/k/a "peanuts",milton Rockman, A/k/a "maishe", Nicholas Auletta, A/k/a"nick", Edward J. Halloran, A/k/a "biff", Alvin O. Chattin,a/k/a "al", Richard Costa, A/k/a "richie", and Aniellomigliore, A/k/a "neil", Defendants,matthew Ianniello, A/k/a "matty the Horse", Vincent Dinapoli, A/k/a "vinnie", Louis Di Napoli, A/k/a "louie",nicholas Auletta, A/k/a "nick", Edward J. Halloran, A/k/a"biff", Aniello Migliore, A/k/a "neil", Anthony Salerno,a/k/a "fat Tony", and Alvin O. Chattin, A/k/a "al",defendants-appellants, 952 F.2d 623 (2d Cir. 1991)
Annotate this CaseAlan M. Cohen, Mark R. Hellerer, Asst. U.S. Attys., S.D.N.Y., New York City (Otto G. Obermaier, U.S. Atty., Jonathan Leibman, Daniel Nardello, Cathy Seibel, Daniel C. Richman, Asst. U.S. Attys., S.D.N.Y., of counsel), for appellee.
Jay Goldberg, New York City (Judd Burstein, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Matthew Ianniello.
Michael E. Tigar, Austin, Tex. (Newman & Schwartz, Gustave H. Newman, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Vincent Di Napoli.
Robert L. Ellis, New York City, for defendant-appellant Louis Di Napoli.
Herbert J. Miller, Jr., Washington, D.C. (Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, Stephen L. Braga, Edith R. Lampson, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Nicholas Auletta.
Frederick P. Hafetz, New York City (Goldman & Hafetz, Susan R. Necheles, Christy & Viener, Arthur H. Christy, Maria T. Galeno, New York City, Toll, Ebby, Langer & Marvin, Peter F. Marvin, Philadelphia, Pa., Jeremy Gutman, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Edward J. Halloran.
Walter P. Loughlin, New York City, for defendant-appellant Aniello Migliore.
Judd Burstein, New York City (John Jacobs, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Anthony Salerno.
Patrick M. Wall, New York City, for defendant-appellant Alvin O. Chattin.
Before PRATT, MINER, and ALTIMARI, Circuit Judges.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the last sentence of Part IIIA2a of the opinion in this case, now published at 937 F.2d 797, 805, is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:
Thus, in interpreting Rule 804(b) (1) and particularly the condition attached to that rule requiring a "similar motive" to develop the prior testimony, we view the testimony of Bruno and DeMatteis as available to the government but unavailable to the defendants. It goes without saying, of course, that we have not considered in this case, because the issue is not before us, whether the government's power to grant immunity would affect a declarant's "availability" under any of the other subdivisions of Rule 804(b).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
