Bernard L. Pratt v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Bernard L. Pratt v. United States

225 F.2d 23

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedSeptember 15, 1955

Docket12272

StatusPublished

This text of 225 F.2d 23 (Bernard L. Pratt v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bernard L. Pratt v. United States, 225 F.2d 23 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Pratt was indicted, tried and convicted of grand larceny. He now urges a number of points respecting admission and exclusion of evidence and instructions to the jury. He made none of these points in the trial court. We have examined them and the record and find no reason to depart from the Rules 1 and to exercise the discretionary power we have in cases of plain errors affecting substantial rights. There was an eyewitness to the alleged larceny, a person who had known Pratt. Pratt himself took the stand and denied he had had any part in the theft or had known the eyewitness. The case was fairly presented, and much depended upon credibility.

Affirmed.

1

. Fed.R.Crim.P. 30, 51, 18 U.S.C.A.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Pratt was indicted, tried and convicted of grand larceny. He now urges a number of points respecting admission and exclusion of evidence and instructions to the jury. He made none of these points in the trial court. We have examined them and the record and find no reason to depart from the Rules 1 and to exercise the discretionary power we have in cases of plain errors affecting substantial rights. There was an eyewitness to the alleged larceny, a person who had known Pratt. Pratt himself took the stand and denied he had had any part in the theft or had known the eyewitness. The case was fairly presented, and much depended upon credibility.

Affirmed.

1

. Fed.R.Crim.P. 30, 51, 18 U.S.C.A.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 F.2d 23, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernard-l-pratt-v-united-states-cadc-1955.