Clarence Farmer v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Clarence Farmer v. United States

341 F.2d 411, 119 U.S. App. D.C. 278

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedDecember 31, 1964

Docket18791_1

StatusPublished

This text of 341 F.2d 411 (Clarence Farmer 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

Clarence Farmer v. United States, 341 F.2d 411, 119 U.S. App. D.C. 278 (D.C. Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of housebreaking and petit larceny. His counsel, appointed by this court, urges two grounds for reversal, (1) that two oral confessions made by appellant were involuntary, 1 and (2) the confessions were not corroborated. Upon consideration of the testimony as to the circumstances in which the confessions were made, and the evidence bearing on the issue of corroboration, we can accept neither ground as a basis for reversal.

Affirmed.

1

. One of the confessions was made to an officer in a telephone conversation prior to arrest. The other was made to the same officer at about the time of arrest of appellant at the apartment of a friend. Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L.Ed.2d 1479 (1957), accordingly has no application

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of housebreaking and petit larceny. His counsel, appointed by this court, urges two grounds for reversal, (1) that two oral confessions made by appellant were involuntary, 1 and (2) the confessions were not corroborated. Upon consideration of the testimony as to the circumstances in which the confessions were made, and the evidence bearing on the issue of corroboration, we can accept neither ground as a basis for reversal.

Affirmed.

1

. One of the confessions was made to an officer in a telephone conversation prior to arrest. The other was made to the same officer at about the time of arrest of appellant at the apartment of a friend. Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L.Ed.2d 1479 (1957), accordingly has no application

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

341 F.2d 411, 119 U.S. App. D.C. 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clarence-farmer-v-united-states-cadc-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack