Cormier v. United States

Sixth Circuit

Cormier v. United States

134 F.2d 616, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 8, 1943

DocketNo. 9067

StatusPublished

This text of 134 F.2d 616 (Cormier v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cormier v. United States, 134 F.2d 616, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634 (6th Cir. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the briefs and record in the above cause and the argument of counsel, it is the view of the court that no prejudicial reversible error occurred during the trial, nor that, considering the instructions of the court as a whole, were there any substantial inaccurate statements of law incorporated therein; wherefore, it is the conclusion of the court that the judgment of conviction should be affirmed, but that it is to be without prejudice to any action that may be taken in the court below to mitigate the sentence imposed upon said appellant to conform to the action taken by the District Judges in respect to the sentences imposed upon the co-defendants of the appellant, such mitigation having previously been denied to the appellant because jurisdiction over him had been lost by reason of his appeal.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the briefs and record in the above cause and the argument of counsel, it is the view of the court that no prejudicial reversible error occurred during the trial, nor that, considering the instructions of the court as a whole, were there any substantial inaccurate statements of law incorporated therein; wherefore, it is the conclusion of the court that the judgment of conviction should be affirmed, but that it is to be without prejudice to any action that may be taken in the court below to mitigate the sentence imposed upon said appellant to conform to the action taken by the District Judges in respect to the sentences imposed upon the co-defendants of the appellant, such mitigation having previously been denied to the appellant because jurisdiction over him had been lost by reason of his appeal.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 F.2d 616, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cormier-v-united-states-ca6-1943.