Ansley v. United States

135 F.2d 207, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3248
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 14, 1943
Docket10339
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 135 F.2d 207 (Ansley v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ansley v. United States, 135 F.2d 207, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3248 (5th Cir. 1943).

Opinions

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

These appellants were convicted of conspiring to violate the internal revenue laws relating to intoxicating liquor. They seek to reverse the judgment upon the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict, and that prejudicial procedural errors were committed in the course of the trial.'

The record discloses that these appellants moved for a directed verdict at the close of the Government’s case, but thereafter they introduced evidence in their own behalf, and failed to renew their motion at the close of all the evidence. The failure to renew operated to waive the benefit of the motion made,1 and the question of the sufficiency of the evidence was not properly saved for review by this court.2 It is true that the question may and should be raised by the court of its own motion, if necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice, but this is not such a case. We have examined the record, and have found it to contain ample evidence to support the judgment as to each appellant. The court below declined to set aside the conviction of Mrs. Lewis, but recognized there were extenuating circumstances in her favor and gave her a very light sentence, suspending the execution thereof entirely and placing her on probation.

The other questions raised with respect to rulings upon the admissibility of evidence and the charge of the court have been reviewed and are without merit.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Martinez
2022 NMSC 004 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 2021)
United States v. Delgado
631 F.3d 685 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)
Carlisle v. United States
517 U.S. 416 (Supreme Court, 1996)
United States v. Robert Dibernardo and Theodore Rothstein
880 F.2d 1216 (Eleventh Circuit, 1989)
United States v. Broadus
664 F. Supp. 592 (District of Columbia, 1987)
United States v. Nava-Maldonado
566 F. Supp. 1436 (D. Nevada, 1983)
United States v. Phillips
563 F. Supp. 267 (M.D. Louisiana, 1983)
United States v. Tommy J. Hines
563 F.2d 737 (Fifth Circuit, 1977)
Rank v. State
373 P.2d 734 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1962)
Odell Clark v. United States
293 F.2d 445 (Fifth Circuit, 1961)
James Ivey Wyatt v. United States
263 F.2d 304 (Fifth Circuit, 1959)
Howard Meeks v. United States
259 F.2d 328 (Fifth Circuit, 1958)
Joseph Tomley v. United States
250 F.2d 549 (Fifth Circuit, 1958)
United States v. Anthony
145 F. Supp. 323 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1956)
Lima Lynn Kivette and Dow Kivette v. United States
230 F.2d 749 (Fifth Circuit, 1956)
C. G. Benham v. United States
215 F.2d 472 (Fifth Circuit, 1954)
Willie v. United States
213 F.2d 624 (Fifth Circuit, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
135 F.2d 207, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ansley-v-united-states-ca5-1943.