Shevitz v. United State

Fourth Circuit

Shevitz v. United State

12 F.2d 598, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3314

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 30, 1926

DocketNos. 2439, 2440

StatusPublished

This text of 12 F.2d 598 (Shevitz v. United State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shevitz v. United State, 12 F.2d 598, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3314 (4th Cir. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

These two eases were tried together in the District Court by consent and were heard together here. Plaintiffs in error were charged with violation of the National Prohibition Act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § ÍOISS^. et seq.), and their defense was an'alibi.

The questions involved were questions of fact, and these have been decided against plaintiffs in error by the jury which.tried them. There was ample evidence to sustain the verdict and it is not our province to pass upon the credibility of witnesses or the probabilities of conflicting testimony. The trial judge fairly and impartially instructed the jury as to the law applicable to- the ease, and the exceptions to his charge are without merit. There was no error, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

These two eases were tried together in the District Court by consent and were heard together here. Plaintiffs in error were charged with violation of the National Prohibition Act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § ÍOISS^. et seq.), and their defense was an'alibi.

The questions involved were questions of fact, and these have been decided against plaintiffs in error by the jury which.tried them. There was ample evidence to sustain the verdict and it is not our province to pass upon the credibility of witnesses or the probabilities of conflicting testimony. The trial judge fairly and impartially instructed the jury as to the law applicable to- the ease, and the exceptions to his charge are without merit. There was no error, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 F.2d 598, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shevitz-v-united-state-ca4-1926.