Jauris Anderson v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Jauris Anderson v. United States

253 F.2d 419, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 3872

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 5, 1958

Docket15684_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 253 F.2d 419 (Jauris Anderson 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

Jauris Anderson v. United States, 253 F.2d 419, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 3872 (9th Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Anderson, a person employed in the United States Postal Service, was convicted by a jury of the crime of embezzling letters which came into his possession intended to be conveyed by mail. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1709. He was sentenced, and now appeals. The sole ground is his claim that there was insufficient evidence to prove a felonious intent to embezzle mail. Technically, he has no standing to complain. A motion was made for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence for the government. The court denied the motion. Anderson then introduced evidence and himself testified. After the taking of all evidence was completed the motion for acquittal was not renewed. The prior motion was thereby waived. See Note 1 to United States v. Calderon, 348 U.S. 160, 164, 75 S.Ct. 186, 99 L.Ed. 202. The jury was correctly instructed by the court that it was essential for them to find such a felonious intent before there could be a conviction. There was substantial evidence to support the verdict. The question was one of pure fact. There was no legal error. The finding of the jury is therefore binding.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Anderson, a person employed in the United States Postal Service, was convicted by a jury of the crime of embezzling letters which came into his possession intended to be conveyed by mail. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1709. He was sentenced, and now appeals. The sole ground is his claim that there was insufficient evidence to prove a felonious intent to embezzle mail. Technically, he has no standing to complain. A motion was made for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence for the government. The court denied the motion. Anderson then introduced evidence and himself testified. After the taking of all evidence was completed the motion for acquittal was not renewed. The prior motion was thereby waived. See Note 1 to United States v. Calderon, 348 U.S. 160, 164, 75 S.Ct. 186, 99 L.Ed. 202. The jury was correctly instructed by the court that it was essential for them to find such a felonious intent before there could be a conviction. There was substantial evidence to support the verdict. The question was one of pure fact. There was no legal error. The finding of the jury is therefore binding.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 F.2d 419, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 3872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jauris-anderson-v-united-states-ca9-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack