Henry E. Lee v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Henry E. Lee v. United States

344 F.2d 566, 120 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6268

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 11, 1965

Docket18803_1

StatusPublished

This text of 344 F.2d 566 (Henry E. Lee v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Henry E. Lee v. United States, 344 F.2d 566, 120 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6268 (D.C. Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of assault upon a Metropolitan Police officer. 22 D.C.Code § 505(a) (1961). We have carefully studied the points raised on appeal and find no basis for reversing the conviction. We note, however, that the jury asked if it could recommend mercy and was advised by the trial judge that it could not. The inference is plain that this desire on the part of the jury grew out of the emotional situation in which the assault occurred. The appellant and others were present at the D. C. General Hospital. They became upset by what they thought was inattention to the relative of one of them who had been injured in an accident. The police were called and the conduct which constituted the crime resulted.

In these circumstances, in view of appellant’s age and lack of prior criminal record, and especially the apparent feeling of the jury that the punishment should be tempered with mercy, the Dis *567 trict Court may wish to reconsider the sentence imposed. Rule 35, Fhd.R.Crim. P. See Kaplan v. United States, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 521, 523, cert. denied, 354 U.S. 941, 77 S.Ct. 1406, 1 L.Ed.2d 1539 (1957). Compare Scarbeck v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 135, 158, 317 F.2d 546, 569, cert. denied, 374 U.S. 856, 83 S.Ct. 1897, 10 L.Ed.2d 1077, rehearing denied, 375 U.S. 874, 84 S.Ct. 35, 11 L.Ed.2d 105 (1963).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of assault upon a Metropolitan Police officer. 22 D.C.Code § 505(a) (1961). We have carefully studied the points raised on appeal and find no basis for reversing the conviction. We note, however, that the jury asked if it could recommend mercy and was advised by the trial judge that it could not. The inference is plain that this desire on the part of the jury grew out of the emotional situation in which the assault occurred. The appellant and others were present at the D. C. General Hospital. They became upset by what they thought was inattention to the relative of one of them who had been injured in an accident. The police were called and the conduct which constituted the crime resulted.

In these circumstances, in view of appellant’s age and lack of prior criminal record, and especially the apparent feeling of the jury that the punishment should be tempered with mercy, the Dis *567 trict Court may wish to reconsider the sentence imposed. Rule 35, Fhd.R.Crim. P. See Kaplan v. United States, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 521, 523, cert. denied, 354 U.S. 941, 77 S.Ct. 1406, 1 L.Ed.2d 1539 (1957). Compare Scarbeck v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 135, 158, 317 F.2d 546, 569, cert. denied, 374 U.S. 856, 83 S.Ct. 1897, 10 L.Ed.2d 1077, rehearing denied, 375 U.S. 874, 84 S.Ct. 35, 11 L.Ed.2d 105 (1963).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 F.2d 566, 120 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-e-lee-v-united-states-cadc-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack