Dorsey K. Offutt v. United States of a America

D.C. Circuit

Dorsey K. Offutt v. United States of a America

247 F.2d 88, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 97, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3672

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 17, 1957

Docket13572_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 247 F.2d 88 (Dorsey K. Offutt v. United States of a America) 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

Dorsey K. Offutt v. United States of a America, 247 F.2d 88, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 97, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3672 (D.C. Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The case is here for the third time. We cite in the margin references to its prior history in the Supreme Court and in this Court. 1 On the last trial, the subject of the present appeal, appellant was convicted of contempt of court upon the charge that, during the trial of United States v. Peckham, reported on appeal at 93 U.S.App.D.C. 136, 210 F.2d 693, “[o]n numerous occasions he made insolent, insulting and offensive remarks to the court, and was guilty of gross discourtesy to the court.” We hold that the evidence supports the conviction upon this charge and that the validity of the conviction is not impaired by error. Appellant was also convicted upon the charge that on several occasions he asked questions of witnesses during said Peck-ham trial that were highly prejudicial to the witness and as to which there was no foundation. We hold that the evidence does not. support, with the required freedom from doubt, a conviction of criminal contempt upon this charge.

The District Court sentenced appellant to be committed to the custody of the United States Marshal for forty-eight hours. Considering the history of the case as a whole and our present reversal of the conviction upon one of the charges, as above stated, we think the sentence should be reduced to commitment to the custody of the United States Marshal for six hours. 2

The case will be remanded to the District Court with directions to modify the judgment so that the adjudication of guilt is limited to the charge contained in paragraph numbered I in the order to show cause and so that the sentence is reduced to commitment to the custody of the United States Marshal for six hours instead of for forty-eight hours.

Judgment, as so modified, affirmed.

1

. Offutt v. United States, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 148, 208 F.2d 842, reversed, Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 75 S.Ct. 11, 99 L.Ed. 11; Id., 98 U.S.App.D.C. 69, 232 F.2d 69, 70, certiorari denied 351 U.S. 988, 76 S.Ct. 1049, 100 L.Ed. 786.

2

. See United States v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258, 304-305, 67 S.Ct. 677, 91 L.Ed. 884; Rosenfeld v. United States, 4 Cir., 167 F.2d 222, 223.

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

PER CURIAM.

The case is here for the third time. We cite in the margin references to its prior history in the Supreme Court and in this Court. 1 On the last trial, the subject of the present appeal, appellant was convicted of contempt of court upon the charge that, during the trial of United States v. Peckham, reported on appeal at 93 U.S.App.D.C. 136, 210 F.2d 693, “[o]n numerous occasions he made insolent, insulting and offensive remarks to the court, and was guilty of gross discourtesy to the court.” We hold that the evidence supports the conviction upon this charge and that the validity of the conviction is not impaired by error. Appellant was also convicted upon the charge that on several occasions he asked questions of witnesses during said Peck-ham trial that were highly prejudicial to the witness and as to which there was no foundation. We hold that the evidence does not. support, with the required freedom from doubt, a conviction of criminal contempt upon this charge.

The District Court sentenced appellant to be committed to the custody of the United States Marshal for forty-eight hours. Considering the history of the case as a whole and our present reversal of the conviction upon one of the charges, as above stated, we think the sentence should be reduced to commitment to the custody of the United States Marshal for six hours. 2

The case will be remanded to the District Court with directions to modify the judgment so that the adjudication of guilt is limited to the charge contained in paragraph numbered I in the order to show cause and so that the sentence is reduced to commitment to the custody of the United States Marshal for six hours instead of for forty-eight hours.

Judgment, as so modified, affirmed.

1

. Offutt v. United States, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 148, 208 F.2d 842, reversed, Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 75 S.Ct. 11, 99 L.Ed. 11; Id., 98 U.S.App.D.C. 69, 232 F.2d 69, 70, certiorari denied 351 U.S. 988, 76 S.Ct. 1049, 100 L.Ed. 786.

2

. See United States v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S. 258, 304-305, 67 S.Ct. 677, 91 L.Ed. 884; Rosenfeld v. United States, 4 Cir., 167 F.2d 222, 223.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 F.2d 88, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 97, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorsey-k-offutt-v-united-states-of-a-america-cadc-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack