Reynolds v. United States

D.C. Circuit

Reynolds v. United States

213 F.2d 619, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 189, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3553

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 3, 1954

Docket12012_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 213 F.2d 619 (Reynolds v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Reynolds v. United States, 213 F.2d 619, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 189, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3553 (D.C. Cir. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Six counts of an indictment returned May 6, 1953, charged Raymond J. Watson and the appellant, Charles Reynolds, with violating the narcotics statutes. A seventh count charged Reynolds alone with purchasing, selling, dispensing and distributing certain capsules containing a mixturé of morphine sulphate, not in or from the original stamped package.

When the case was called for trial October 19,1953, Watson withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to Counts 1 and 6. Although no disposition had been made of tha other four counts against Watson, the trial proceeded against Reynolds alone, who was found guilty under all seven counts.. He was fined and sentenced to imprisonment for from three to ten years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.

On this appeal Reynolds alleges error in the trial judge’s refusal to instruct the jury that it might infer from the government’s failure to introduce Watson as a witness that his testimony would have been unfavorable to the prosecution. He asserts Watson was available to the government but could not be called by him because he was a co-indictee. This assignment of error, which relates only to the first six counts in which Watson and Reynolds were both charged, need not be considered. Reynolds’ conviction under the seventh count, in which he alone was accused, — with respect' to which we find no error — is sufficient to support the sentence imposed upon him. Jackson v. United States, 94 U.S.App.D.C. -, 214 F.2d 240.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Six counts of an indictment returned May 6, 1953, charged Raymond J. Watson and the appellant, Charles Reynolds, with violating the narcotics statutes. A seventh count charged Reynolds alone with purchasing, selling, dispensing and distributing certain capsules containing a mixturé of morphine sulphate, not in or from the original stamped package.

When the case was called for trial October 19,1953, Watson withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to Counts 1 and 6. Although no disposition had been made of tha other four counts against Watson, the trial proceeded against Reynolds alone, who was found guilty under all seven counts.. He was fined and sentenced to imprisonment for from three to ten years on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.

On this appeal Reynolds alleges error in the trial judge’s refusal to instruct the jury that it might infer from the government’s failure to introduce Watson as a witness that his testimony would have been unfavorable to the prosecution. He asserts Watson was available to the government but could not be called by him because he was a co-indictee. This assignment of error, which relates only to the first six counts in which Watson and Reynolds were both charged, need not be considered. Reynolds’ conviction under the seventh count, in which he alone was accused, — with respect' to which we find no error — is sufficient to support the sentence imposed upon him. Jackson v. United States, 94 U.S.App.D.C. -, 214 F.2d 240.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 F.2d 619, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 189, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3553, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynolds-v-united-states-cadc-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack