Glynn M. Johnson v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Glynn M. Johnson v. United States

427 F.2d 712, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8630

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1970

Docket21988

StatusPublished

This text of 427 F.2d 712 (Glynn M. Johnson v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Glynn M. Johnson v. United States, 427 F.2d 712, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8630 (9th Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Johnson was convicted in March, 1967, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California of selling a postal money order without authority in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 (1964). His appeal was originally scheduled to be heard in April, *713 1969, but was postponed at his request. It came on again in March, 1970, at which time, also at his request, his original attorney was relieved and new counsel appointed. His new counsel was allowed time to file a supplemental brief, and the case was then submitted on the briefs without oral argument.

Having carefully examined the briefs and record, including the supplemental brief filed by appellant’s new counsel, we are convinced that Johnson’s conviction must be affirmed. Although both counsel for appellant have argued very ably to the contrary in their briefs, it is the opinion of this Court that the evidence of the defendant’s prior acts was properly admitted on the issue of intent. Fineberg v. United States, 393 F.2d 417, 419-420 (9th Cir. 1968).

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Johnson was convicted in March, 1967, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California of selling a postal money order without authority in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 (1964). His appeal was originally scheduled to be heard in April, *713 1969, but was postponed at his request. It came on again in March, 1970, at which time, also at his request, his original attorney was relieved and new counsel appointed. His new counsel was allowed time to file a supplemental brief, and the case was then submitted on the briefs without oral argument.

Having carefully examined the briefs and record, including the supplemental brief filed by appellant’s new counsel, we are convinced that Johnson’s conviction must be affirmed. Although both counsel for appellant have argued very ably to the contrary in their briefs, it is the opinion of this Court that the evidence of the defendant’s prior acts was properly admitted on the issue of intent. Fineberg v. United States, 393 F.2d 417, 419-420 (9th Cir. 1968).

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

427 F.2d 712, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glynn-m-johnson-v-united-states-ca9-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack