Frank Stanley Nix v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Frank Stanley Nix v. United States

259 F.2d 693, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4773

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 17, 1958

Docket17254

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 259 F.2d 693 (Frank Stanley Nix v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frank Stanley Nix v. United States, 259 F.2d 693, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4773 (5th Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted upon all five counts of an indictment which charged possession and operation of an illegal still and the possession of untaxed liquor. By his appeal he asserts that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the conviction. No evidence was received over objection. No motion for judgment of acquittal was made. No exceptions were taken to the instructions given and no additional instructions were requested. Nothing has been preserved for review. Tomley v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 250 F.2d 549. It does not appear that there has been any miscarriage of justice that requires us to invoke Rule 52(b), Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. 18 U.S.C.A. Thompson v. United States, 5 Cir., 245 F.2d 232.

The judgment is Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted upon all five counts of an indictment which charged possession and operation of an illegal still and the possession of untaxed liquor. By his appeal he asserts that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the conviction. No evidence was received over objection. No motion for judgment of acquittal was made. No exceptions were taken to the instructions given and no additional instructions were requested. Nothing has been preserved for review. Tomley v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 250 F.2d 549. It does not appear that there has been any miscarriage of justice that requires us to invoke Rule 52(b), Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. 18 U.S.C.A. Thompson v. United States, 5 Cir., 245 F.2d 232.

The judgment is Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 F.2d 693, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-stanley-nix-v-united-states-ca5-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack