Cline v. United States

116 F.2d 275, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 2616
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedDecember 20, 1940
DocketNo. 9561
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 116 F.2d 275 (Cline 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
Cline v. United States, 116 F.2d 275, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 2616 (5th Cir. 1940).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant entered a plea of guilty February 5, 1940, and was sentenced to three years imprisonment on the first count; and'fifteen years on the remaining counts, with execution suspended for probation to begin at expiration of service of the sentence on the first count. On the same day, in jail awaiting transportation to the penitentiary, Cline’s person was searched and a large quantity of contraband narcotics was found. He was brought back into court, and the judge revoked the suspension of execution of sentence on the counts other than the first, and changed the term from fifteen years to ten years, to be served on expiration of service of the sentence on the first count. Notice of appeal was filed, the. grounds all relating to the legality of the search, and the power of the judge, before the time of probation had arrived, to revoke it and resentence on the counts as to which execution of sentence was suspended. Bail was granted pending appeal, and on April 22 the court granted an extension of time for sixty days to perfect the appeal. The appeal was docketed in this court June 10. On call of the case for argument on Nov. 15, after due notice of its setting, no transcript of the record or brief had been filed and the United States moved to dismiss the appeal. Counsel for appellant asked for time to file a brief which has expired and no brief has been filed. The case is subject to dismissal under our rules for want of prosecution, but we have looked into its merits far enough to satisfy ourselves that the search of a convict about to be transported to the penitentiary is not unlawful; and that the judge had power to take the action he did. No sufficient reason appears why our rules should not be enforced. The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Dismissed.

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

Related

United States v. Joseph James Wright, Jr.
744 F.2d 1127 (Fifth Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Dozier
543 F. Supp. 880 (M.D. Louisiana, 1982)
United States v. James David Ross
503 F.2d 940 (Fifth Circuit, 1974)
Wright v. United States
315 A.2d 839 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1974)
United States ex rel. Sole v. Rundle
435 F.2d 721 (Third Circuit, 1971)
Davis v. Parker
293 F. Supp. 1388 (D. Delaware, 1968)
United States v. Joseph Henry Donat Norin
378 F.2d 472 (Second Circuit, 1967)
Reed v. United States
236 F. Supp. 967 (S.D. Texas, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 F.2d 275, 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 2616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cline-v-united-states-ca5-1940.