Ronald Cassady and Joseph Elbert Clements v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Ronald Cassady and Joseph Elbert Clements v. United States

395 F.2d 205, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7007

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 9, 1968

Docket24563

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 395 F.2d 205 (Ronald Cassady and Joseph Elbert Clements 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

Ronald Cassady and Joseph Elbert Clements v. United States, 395 F.2d 205, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7007 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellants, convicted on a jury verdict of knowingly transporting a stolen vehicle in interstate commerce in violation of the Dyer Act, seek reversal of their convictions on various grounds, only two of which deserve comment. It is urged that the District Court committed error in admitting a photostatic copy of a portion of the rental contract by which appellants obtained possession of the vehicle, and in admitting certain credit cards and evidence of their use by appellants during the interstate transportation of the vehicle. We affirm.

The copy of the car rental contract was improperly admitted into evidence since there was no testimony to establish that the copy was made in the ordinary course of business. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1732. However, in view of the substantial and uncontradicted evidence, aside from the contract, that the automobile was fraudulently procured and transported by appellants from Nevada to Alabama, we are convinced that admission of the contract was harmless error not requiring reversal of the conviction. Rule 52(a), Fed.R.Crim.P.

The receipt into evidence of credit cards bearing the name of one James Matush (the name assumed by Cassady when renting the car and on the interstate journey) and of testimony concerning their use was proper as part of the res gestae. Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir. 1953, 205 F.2d 806; Logan v. United States, 5 Cir. 1951, 192 F.2d 388.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellants, convicted on a jury verdict of knowingly transporting a stolen vehicle in interstate commerce in violation of the Dyer Act, seek reversal of their convictions on various grounds, only two of which deserve comment. It is urged that the District Court committed error in admitting a photostatic copy of a portion of the rental contract by which appellants obtained possession of the vehicle, and in admitting certain credit cards and evidence of their use by appellants during the interstate transportation of the vehicle. We affirm.

The copy of the car rental contract was improperly admitted into evidence since there was no testimony to establish that the copy was made in the ordinary course of business. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1732. However, in view of the substantial and uncontradicted evidence, aside from the contract, that the automobile was fraudulently procured and transported by appellants from Nevada to Alabama, we are convinced that admission of the contract was harmless error not requiring reversal of the conviction. Rule 52(a), Fed.R.Crim.P.

The receipt into evidence of credit cards bearing the name of one James Matush (the name assumed by Cassady when renting the car and on the interstate journey) and of testimony concerning their use was proper as part of the res gestae. Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir. 1953, 205 F.2d 806; Logan v. United States, 5 Cir. 1951, 192 F.2d 388.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

395 F.2d 205, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7007, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ronald-cassady-and-joseph-elbert-clements-v-united-states-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack