Fletcher v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Fletcher v. United States

49 A.2d 88, 1946 D.C. App. LEXIS 168

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 10, 1946

DocketNo. 419

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 49 A.2d 88 (Fletcher v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fletcher v. United States, 49 A.2d 88, 1946 D.C. App. LEXIS 168 (D.C. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Appellant was convicted of knowingly having in his possession “numbers slips” in violation of Code, Section 22 — 1502. The Government has confessed error and agrees to a reversal.

Since public interest prevents shi ft-ing the responsibility for reversal from the appellate court to the prosecuting official, a conviction for crime cannot be set aside on confession of error alone.¹ We have, therefore, required that the case be argued and have made a thorough examination of the record.

Appellant was arrested for intoxication and after his arrest certain slips or scraps of paper were found in his possession. On these pieces of paper were written numbers but no dates or names. In the opinion of the arresting officer, the papers were “numbers slips”; but the officer gave no reason for his opinion except that he had observed people writing numbers and had had experience in arresting persons engaged in writing numbers. As to whether the alleged slips were those of a player, a runner or a banker, the officer was not asked and offered no opinion.

It may well be that the papers represented some transaction or step in the numbers game, but the evidence is so far from convincing as to raise a doubt in our minds as to its sufficiency to sustain a conviction. In view of the District Attorney’s confession of error, we resolve the doubt in appellant’s favor.

On other errors assigned by appellant,, but not concurred in by the Government* we express no opinion.

Reversed.

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

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Appellant was convicted of knowingly having in his possession “numbers slips” in violation of Code, Section 22 — 1502. The Government has confessed error and agrees to a reversal.

Since public interest prevents shi ft-ing the responsibility for reversal from the appellate court to the prosecuting official, a conviction for crime cannot be set aside on confession of error alone.¹ We have, therefore, required that the case be argued and have made a thorough examination of the record.

Appellant was arrested for intoxication and after his arrest certain slips or scraps of paper were found in his possession. On these pieces of paper were written numbers but no dates or names. In the opinion of the arresting officer, the papers were “numbers slips”; but the officer gave no reason for his opinion except that he had observed people writing numbers and had had experience in arresting persons engaged in writing numbers. As to whether the alleged slips were those of a player, a runner or a banker, the officer was not asked and offered no opinion.

It may well be that the papers represented some transaction or step in the numbers game, but the evidence is so far from convincing as to raise a doubt in our minds as to its sufficiency to sustain a conviction. In view of the District Attorney’s confession of error, we resolve the doubt in appellant’s favor.

On other errors assigned by appellant,, but not concurred in by the Government* we express no opinion.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.2d 88, 1946 D.C. App. LEXIS 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fletcher-v-united-states-dc-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack