Gaudio v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Gaudio v. United States

179 F.2d 300, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2210

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 9, 1950

Docket6004_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 179 F.2d 300 (Gaudio v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gaudio v. United States, 179 F.2d 300, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2210 (4th Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal in a criminal case by a defendant who was convicted of passing counterfeit currency. Appellant complains of the action of the trial court in ordering the prosecution against 'him tried along with that against another person charged with a similar offense in connection with the same transaction, in refusing to continue the cases after ordering them consolidated for trial and in permitting the United States Attorney to question defendant on cross examination as to his failure to make beforehand certain contentions made by him in his testimony. None of the questions raised is of sufficient merit to justify discussion. The consolidation and refusal of continuance were matters resting within the Judge’s discretion, which was not abused; and the questions which the United States Attorney was permitted to ask were clearly within the limits ■of proper cross examination, as were his comments thereon in his argument to the jury. There was no error, and the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal in a criminal case by a defendant who was convicted of passing counterfeit currency. Appellant complains of the action of the trial court in ordering the prosecution against 'him tried along with that against another person charged with a similar offense in connection with the same transaction, in refusing to continue the cases after ordering them consolidated for trial and in permitting the United States Attorney to question defendant on cross examination as to his failure to make beforehand certain contentions made by him in his testimony. None of the questions raised is of sufficient merit to justify discussion. The consolidation and refusal of continuance were matters resting within the Judge’s discretion, which was not abused; and the questions which the United States Attorney was permitted to ask were clearly within the limits ■of proper cross examination, as were his comments thereon in his argument to the jury. There was no error, and the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F.2d 300, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaudio-v-united-states-ca4-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack