Dolan v. United States

4 F.2d 251, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2948
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided March 16, 1925·No. No. 4257·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have here conviction and punishment as for a third offense. An allegation in an indictment that an offense is a second one is a conclusion, and it should be sufficiently shown that the later offense occurred after the conviction for the earlier one. Even so, this indictment alleges and the proof shows a sufficiently early conviction as and for1 a second offense; it must be presumed that such conviction was rightful, and this presumption sufficiently cures any possible lack of particularity by not stating the date of the offense which was the basis of , that conviction.

The judgment is affirmed, and the mandate will issue forthwith.

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

Dolan v. United States, 4 F.2d 251, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2948 (6th Cir. 1925).

4 F.2d 251 (Dolan v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gatterdam v. United States
5 F.2d 673 (Sixth Circuit, 1925)