James Hsaji Watada v. United States

Ninth Circuit

James Hsaji Watada v. United States

301 F.2d 869, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 5394

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 13, 1962

Docket17449_1

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 301 F.2d 869 (James Hsaji Watada 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

James Hsaji Watada v. United States, 301 F.2d 869, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 5394 (9th Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted on the first and found not guilty on the second of a two count indictment charging him in the first count, with procuring an airplane ticket covering transportation from San Francisco, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, and used in interstate commerce to transport a woman for the purpose of prostitution. (18 U.S.C. § 2421.) The second count had charged appellant with inducing and persuading the woman to so travel for such purpose. (18 U.S.C. § 2422.) Jurisdiction lies here on appeal. (28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1294(1).)

The appellant does not question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction in count one. His only contentions in this appeal are that the trial court (1) failed to observe the provisions of Rule 30, Fed.R.Crim.P. (Title 18 U.S.C.), and (2) failed to give a requested cautionary instruction relating to the testimony of a prostitute. General instructions on the credibility of the witnesses were given.

Since counsel for appellant was in no manner inhibited or restricted in his argument to the jury, we find no prejudice to appellant by the failure of the court to observe the provisions of Rule 30, or to give the requested instruction and appellant has suggested none. The general instructions given were sufficient. Chargois v. United States, 9 Cir., 1959, 267 F.2d 410, 412.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted on the first and found not guilty on the second of a two count indictment charging him in the first count, with procuring an airplane ticket covering transportation from San Francisco, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, and used in interstate commerce to transport a woman for the purpose of prostitution. (18 U.S.C. § 2421.) The second count had charged appellant with inducing and persuading the woman to so travel for such purpose. (18 U.S.C. § 2422.) Jurisdiction lies here on appeal. (28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1294(1).)

The appellant does not question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction in count one. His only contentions in this appeal are that the trial court (1) failed to observe the provisions of Rule 30, Fed.R.Crim.P. (Title 18 U.S.C.), and (2) failed to give a requested cautionary instruction relating to the testimony of a prostitute. General instructions on the credibility of the witnesses were given.

Since counsel for appellant was in no manner inhibited or restricted in his argument to the jury, we find no prejudice to appellant by the failure of the court to observe the provisions of Rule 30, or to give the requested instruction and appellant has suggested none. The general instructions given were sufficient. Chargois v. United States, 9 Cir., 1959, 267 F.2d 410, 412.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 F.2d 869, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 5394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-hsaji-watada-v-united-states-ca9-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack