Joe Don Sarsycki v. United States

Tenth Circuit

Joe Don Sarsycki v. United States

344 F.2d 960, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5738

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedApril 30, 1965

Docket7984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 344 F.2d 960 (Joe Don Sarsycki v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Joe Don Sarsycki v. United States, 344 F.2d 960, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5738 (10th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this direct appeal from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of various narcotic offenses appellant Sarsycki seeks reversal on the sole ground that the prosecutor’s closing argument was unfair and improper. That argument contains metaphorical allusions and oratorical efforts which are not befitting an officer who is charged with the duty of fairly, firmly, and dispassionately prosecuting offenses against federal statutes. Sill Corporation v. United States, 10 Cir., 343 F.2d 411. The question is whether the argument was so offensive as to deprive appellant of a fair trial. McManaman v. United States, 10 Cir., 327 F.2d 21, 24, certiorari denied sub nom. Jenkins v. United States, 377 U.S. 945, 84 S.Ct. 1351, 12 L.Ed.2d 307.

The record shows that appellant engaged in the narcotic traffic. The evidence of the government was not denied. The trial judge ruled that the argument was within proper limits. In our opinion the flamboyant statements could not have unfairly or unduly influenced the jury.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this direct appeal from the judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of various narcotic offenses appellant Sarsycki seeks reversal on the sole ground that the prosecutor’s closing argument was unfair and improper. That argument contains metaphorical allusions and oratorical efforts which are not befitting an officer who is charged with the duty of fairly, firmly, and dispassionately prosecuting offenses against federal statutes. Sill Corporation v. United States, 10 Cir., 343 F.2d 411. The question is whether the argument was so offensive as to deprive appellant of a fair trial. McManaman v. United States, 10 Cir., 327 F.2d 21, 24, certiorari denied sub nom. Jenkins v. United States, 377 U.S. 945, 84 S.Ct. 1351, 12 L.Ed.2d 307.

The record shows that appellant engaged in the narcotic traffic. The evidence of the government was not denied. The trial judge ruled that the argument was within proper limits. In our opinion the flamboyant statements could not have unfairly or unduly influenced the jury.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 F.2d 960, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5738, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joe-don-sarsycki-v-united-states-ca10-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack