Government of the Virgin Islands v. James Alfred Taylor

Third Circuit

Government of the Virgin Islands v. James Alfred Taylor

375 F.2d 771, 6 V.I. 134, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7061

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 17, 1967

Docket16338_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 375 F.2d 771 (Government of the Virgin Islands v. James Alfred Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Government of the Virgin Islands v. James Alfred Taylor, 375 F.2d 771, 6 V.I. 134, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7061 (3d Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

GORDON, District Judge

OPINION OF THE COURT

Appellant, convicted of attempted rape in the first degree, raises two issues on this appeal. He argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s guilty verdict. The. difficulty with appellant’s position is that he seeks to point out discrepancies and contradictions in. the testimony as supporting reversal. The reconciliation of conflicting testimony is for the jury. The burden he carries on appeal is that of showing that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, does not support the verdict. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Lake, 5 V.I. 594, 362 F.2d 770 (C.A. 3, 1966). We have reviewed the record and find that the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.

In his second point, appellant maintains that the court erred in failing to grant a view of the truck where the attempted rape occurred. Once again he carries a heavy burden. A view is not a matter of right; a grant or denial thereof rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, Hodge v. United States, 126 F.2d 849 (C.A.D.C., 1942); VI Wigmore, Evidence § 1164 (3d ed.), and will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. No abuse of discretion appears in the record before us.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed..

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

GORDON, District Judge

OPINION OF THE COURT

Appellant, convicted of attempted rape in the first degree, raises two issues on this appeal. He argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s guilty verdict. The. difficulty with appellant’s position is that he seeks to point out discrepancies and contradictions in. the testimony as supporting reversal. The reconciliation of conflicting testimony is for the jury. The burden he carries on appeal is that of showing that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, does not support the verdict. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Lake, 5 V.I. 594, 362 F.2d 770 (C.A. 3, 1966). We have reviewed the record and find that the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.

In his second point, appellant maintains that the court erred in failing to grant a view of the truck where the attempted rape occurred. Once again he carries a heavy burden. A view is not a matter of right; a grant or denial thereof rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, Hodge v. United States, 126 F.2d 849 (C.A.D.C., 1942); VI Wigmore, Evidence § 1164 (3d ed.), and will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. No abuse of discretion appears in the record before us.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

375 F.2d 771, 6 V.I. 134, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/government-of-the-virgin-islands-v-james-alfred-taylor-ca3-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack