James v. United States

D.C. Circuit

James v. United States

204 F.2d 733, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 275, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2515

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMay 21, 1953

Docket11504_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 F.2d 733 (James 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

James v. United States, 204 F.2d 733, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 275, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2515 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of entering a store with intent to steal, and of maliciously destroying property. His principle contentions are (1) that the officers who arrested him without a warrant had no probable cause to believe he had committed a felony, and therefore the evidence taken from him was illegally seized and should have been suppressed; and (2) the evidence presented at the trial was insufficient to convict. We find no error.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of entering a store with intent to steal, and of maliciously destroying property. His principle contentions are (1) that the officers who arrested him without a warrant had no probable cause to believe he had committed a felony, and therefore the evidence taken from him was illegally seized and should have been suppressed; and (2) the evidence presented at the trial was insufficient to convict. We find no error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F.2d 733, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 275, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-v-united-states-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack