Matthew Britt Porter v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Matthew Britt Porter v. United States

338 F.2d 53

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 27, 1964

Docket21225_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 338 F.2d 53 (Matthew Britt Porter 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

Matthew Britt Porter v. United States, 338 F.2d 53 (5th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In his appeal from a conviction for the sale of non-tax-paid spirits, the only material point urged as error is the refusal of the district court to strike evidence of admission by the appellant of his prior activities in moonshining operations. The evidence was admissible under the rule announced in Smith v. United States, 9th Cir. 1930, 41 F.2d 215. See Barshop v. United States, 5th Cir. 1951, 191 F.2d 286, reh. den. 192 F.2d 699, cert. den. 342 U.S. 920, 72 S.Ct. 367, 96 L.Ed. 688. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In his appeal from a conviction for the sale of non-tax-paid spirits, the only material point urged as error is the refusal of the district court to strike evidence of admission by the appellant of his prior activities in moonshining operations. The evidence was admissible under the rule announced in Smith v. United States, 9th Cir. 1930, 41 F.2d 215. See Barshop v. United States, 5th Cir. 1951, 191 F.2d 286, reh. den. 192 F.2d 699, cert. den. 342 U.S. 920, 72 S.Ct. 367, 96 L.Ed. 688. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

338 F.2d 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthew-britt-porter-v-united-states-ca5-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack