James Malcolm Bearden v. United States

271 F.2d 708
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 24, 1959
Docket17848
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 271 F.2d 708 (James Malcolm Bearden 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
James Malcolm Bearden v. United States, 271 F.2d 708 (5th Cir. 1959).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a judgment based on a jury verdict forfeiting certain property as “property intended for use” in the illegal manufacture of distilled spirits, the only question is as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a verdict. The record discloses that appellant made no motion for directed verdict at the close of all the evidence. Thus, no ruling of the trial court can be pointed to as constituting error. In the absence of such motion and order thereon or a showing, which is not made here, of plain error working manifest injustice. Cf. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States, 5 Cir., 264 F.2d 161, an appeal based on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence presents nothing to this Court for review. Stokes v. Continental Assurance Co., 5 Cir., 242 F.2d 893; Williams v. National, 5 Cir., 257 F.2d 771.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
271 F.2d 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-malcolm-bearden-v-united-states-ca5-1959.