Henry Herman Upham v. United States

328 F.2d 661
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 27, 1964
Docket20359
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 328 F.2d 661 (Henry Herman Upham v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Henry Herman Upham v. United States, 328 F.2d 661 (5th Cir. 1964).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

During the trial of this Mann Act case the victim testified differently than she had previously indicated she would and contrary to a written statement signed by her. After an initial effort to get her to recant her testimony unfavorable to the prosecution, the United States Attorney let her depart from the witness stand. Thereafter, when the FBI agent who took her initial statement was on the stand, the Government had the victim’s statement identified and tendered it in evidence. It was received without limitations on the purpose for which it could be considered and without objection. It was an extremely damaging statement. While appellant’s counsel did not request an instruction that the statement be considered only as impeaching the witness, the need for such a charge to the jury was so obvious and the failure to give it so prejudicial to the appellant that this Court must notice the failure as “[p]lain errors * * * affecting substantial rights” of the accused under Rule 52(b) F.R.Crim.Proc.

The judgment of conviction must be set aside and the case remanded for further proceedings in the trial court.

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

Related

United States v. Kasper
58 M.J. 314 (Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 2003)
United States v. Beth Ann Oxford and Leonard P. Wolf
735 F.2d 276 (Seventh Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Reubin W. Peaden, A/K/A Smokey Peaden
727 F.2d 1493 (Eleventh Circuit, 1984)
United States v. James William Miller
664 F.2d 94 (Fifth Circuit, 1981)
Nettles v. State
380 So. 2d 246 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1980)
United States v. Robert Luther Barnes
586 F.2d 1052 (Fifth Circuit, 1978)
United States v. John Anthony Sisto
534 F.2d 616 (Fifth Circuit, 1976)
United States v. William 'Buddy' Lester
491 F.2d 680 (Sixth Circuit, 1974)
United States v. Jearl Lewis Acreman
434 F.2d 338 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Claude Lewis Lipscomb
425 F.2d 226 (Sixth Circuit, 1970)
Jerome Benson v. United States
402 F.2d 576 (Ninth Circuit, 1968)
State v. Quattrocchi
235 A.2d 99 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1967)
Alfred H. Osborne, Sr. v. United States
351 F.2d 111 (Eighth Circuit, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
328 F.2d 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-herman-upham-v-united-states-ca5-1964.