Glenberg v. United States

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 37
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedJune 6, 1922
DocketNo. 3727
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 37 (Glenberg v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Glenberg v. United States, 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 37 (6th Cir. 1922).

Opinion

DONAHUE, C. J.

Epitomized Opinion

Prosecution by the U. S. District Court, N. D. O. before Westenhaver, Judge. Error to reverse judgment of conviction of violating the Harrison Anti Narcotic Act.

A motion for a new trial was made in the district court, on the ground of newly discovered evidence, and over ruled and sentence imposed. A number of affidavits were filed in support of the motion. The Court of Appeals held,

.(1) A motion for a new trial is directed to the sound discretion of the court, and overruling it is not reviewable, except for an abuse of discretion. In view of the conflicting evidence, that of one affiant' being contradictory of his evidence at the trial in two- important particulars, and wholly inconsistent therewith, and in his affidavit and that of the others being contradicted by counter affidavits, it cannot be said that the action of the trial court in overruling the motion for a new trial was an abuse of discretion.

(2) The queston of the sufficiency of evidence is not presented by the record, but, if it were, it is clear that the verdict of guilty is sustained by substantial evidence, sufficient to furnish the certainty required in a •criminal ease. Judgement of district court affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Ohio Law. Abs. 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glenberg-v-united-states-ca6-1922.