Otto Kuhn v. United States of America, William Clyde Deming v. United States

415 F.2d 111, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10841
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 11, 1969
Docket19030, 19101
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 415 F.2d 111 (Otto Kuhn v. United States of America, William Clyde Deming v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Otto Kuhn v. United States of America, William Clyde Deming v. United States, 415 F.2d 111, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10841 (6th Cir. 1969).

Opinions

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.

Kuhn and Deming appeal from, their convictions under 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1952 on five counts of use of interstate telephone facilities for carrying on a business enterprise of gambling in viola[112]*112tion of state law and one count of conspiracy so to carry on that business. They were found guilty on all counts.

All claims of error raised by appellant Deming have been dealt with in Deming v. United States, 415 F.2d 99. They will not be discussed further.

Appellant Kuhn raises the same issue under Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39, 88 S.Ct. 697, 19 L.Ed.2d 889 and Grosso v. United States, 390 U.S. 62, 88 S.Ct. 709, 19 L.Ed.2d 906, as did Deming. We find no error with respect to the search warrant.

Kuhn also alleges that the District Court erred in permitting Special Agent Carrington, who testified as to the conduct of the gambling operation, to put dates on certain bet slips which were introduced into evidence. Appellant’s theory is that this was done without introducing the documents from which Carrington determined the dates. However, while the chartbooks were not introduced, the racing forms which are the original form in which the information is published were introduced into evidence. Thus Kuhn had the opportunity to test the accuracy of Carrington’s testimony by comparison to the documents on the basis of which he dated the bet slips. There was no error in permitting the dating of the bet slips.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
415 F.2d 111, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/otto-kuhn-v-united-states-of-america-william-clyde-deming-v-united-ca6-1969.