United States of America, and v. James John Decarlo

Ninth Circuit

United States of America, and v. James John Decarlo

446 F.2d 883, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedAugust 13, 1971

Docket71-1860_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 446 F.2d 883 (United States of America, and v. James John Decarlo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States of America, and v. James John Decarlo, 446 F.2d 883, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

De Carlo was convicted of robbing a suburban branch of the United States National Bank at Portland, Oregon.

He has one point on appeal: A government witness blurted out something about his escaping from the Rocky Butte local jail while he was incarcerated after his arrest. For this a timely motion was made for a mistrial. The motion was denied.

The point here does not amount to much. The evidence was overwhelming. De Carlo was photographed in the act and he was found with “bait” money in his possession. Also, his fingerprints were found at the scene of the event. Thus, it was not error to deny a motion for a mistrial. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705; Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 89 S.Ct. 1726, 23 L.Ed.2d 284.

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

PER CURIAM:

De Carlo was convicted of robbing a suburban branch of the United States National Bank at Portland, Oregon.

He has one point on appeal: A government witness blurted out something about his escaping from the Rocky Butte local jail while he was incarcerated after his arrest. For this a timely motion was made for a mistrial. The motion was denied.

The point here does not amount to much. The evidence was overwhelming. De Carlo was photographed in the act and he was found with “bait” money in his possession. Also, his fingerprints were found at the scene of the event. Thus, it was not error to deny a motion for a mistrial. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705; Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 89 S.Ct. 1726, 23 L.Ed.2d 284.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

446 F.2d 883, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-of-america-and-v-james-john-decarlo-ca9-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack