Lawrence Dobbins, Jr., and v. United States of America, And

Ninth Circuit

Lawrence Dobbins, Jr., and v. United States of America, And

397 F.2d 146, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6186

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJuly 9, 1968

Docket22371

StatusPublished

This text of 397 F.2d 146 (Lawrence Dobbins, Jr., and v. United States of America, And) 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

Lawrence Dobbins, Jr., and v. United States of America, And, 397 F.2d 146, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6186 (9th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Dobbins, a postal employee, was convicted of abstracting a letter from the mails. He appeals. We affirm.

A plat of a portion of the terminal annex post office in Los Angeles was offered by the government and received in evidence without objection. What objection could have been made is hard to imagine. We find no error; therefore, no plain error.

An argument is made that the evidence of intent was insufficient. As is usually the case, intent had to be proved by the circumstances. Rarely can intent be photographed. Dobbins testified he had no guilty intent; that he was merely in the process of producing a miscarriage in the mails which would embarrass someone else.

The jury did not have to believe Dobbins and perhaps could have properly drawn some affimative inferences from his demeanor or the great improbability of his explanation.

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

PER CURIAM:

Dobbins, a postal employee, was convicted of abstracting a letter from the mails. He appeals. We affirm.

A plat of a portion of the terminal annex post office in Los Angeles was offered by the government and received in evidence without objection. What objection could have been made is hard to imagine. We find no error; therefore, no plain error.

An argument is made that the evidence of intent was insufficient. As is usually the case, intent had to be proved by the circumstances. Rarely can intent be photographed. Dobbins testified he had no guilty intent; that he was merely in the process of producing a miscarriage in the mails which would embarrass someone else.

The jury did not have to believe Dobbins and perhaps could have properly drawn some affimative inferences from his demeanor or the great improbability of his explanation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

397 F.2d 146, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-dobbins-jr-and-v-united-states-of-america-and-ca9-1968.