Danilo Konvalinka v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Danilo Konvalinka v. United States

287 F.2d 346, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 307, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5475

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJanuary 26, 1961

Docket15908_1

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 287 F.2d 346 (Danilo Konvalinka 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

Danilo Konvalinka v. United States, 287 F.2d 346, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 307, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5475 (D.C. Cir. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of assault after trial in the Municipal Court. D.C. Code § 22-504 (1951). The Municipal Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Konvalinka v. United States, 1960, 162 A.2d 778. We granted leave to appeal. The contentions here urged are of the same nature as those presented to the Municipal Court of Appeals. After careful consideration, we have concluded that the testimony of the complaining witness was sufficiently corroborated, not only by his spontaneous declaration to a police of- *347 fleer immediately after the alleged assault — constituting a measure of corroboration of his own testimony concerning the corpus delicti — but also by the testimony of others tending to confirm his story in respect of such matters as the telephone call and cutting tool, as described in the opinion of the Municipal Court of Appeals. We find no error affecting substantial rights

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of assault after trial in the Municipal Court. D.C. Code § 22-504 (1951). The Municipal Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Konvalinka v. United States, 1960, 162 A.2d 778. We granted leave to appeal. The contentions here urged are of the same nature as those presented to the Municipal Court of Appeals. After careful consideration, we have concluded that the testimony of the complaining witness was sufficiently corroborated, not only by his spontaneous declaration to a police of- *347 fleer immediately after the alleged assault — constituting a measure of corroboration of his own testimony concerning the corpus delicti — but also by the testimony of others tending to confirm his story in respect of such matters as the telephone call and cutting tool, as described in the opinion of the Municipal Court of Appeals. We find no error affecting substantial rights

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 F.2d 346, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 307, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danilo-konvalinka-v-united-states-cadc-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack