United States v. Elijah Eskridge

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Elijah Eskridge

395 F.2d 751, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6861

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 20, 1968

Docket11936_1

StatusPublished

This text of 395 F.2d 751 (United States v. Elijah Eskridge) 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

United States v. Elijah Eskridge, 395 F.2d 751, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6861 (4th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this Dyer Act case, the only question presented on appeal is whether or not defendant Eskridge was sufficiently identified as the driver of the stolen motor vehicle. 18 U.S.C. § 2312. The testimony of three witnesses tends to establish identification. Efforts of defense counsel to cast doubt upon the accuracy of identification presented, of course, a question for the jury, but no question of law is presented for our decision. It is not suggested that the use of photographs was so “impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.” Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 384, 88 S.Ct. 967, 971, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247, 1253 (1968). Nor could it be on the facts of this case. We think the appeal is frivolous and accordingly dismiss without allowing oral argument. Fed.R.Cr.P. 39(a). See United States v. Gregg, 393 F.2d 722 (4th Cir., April 2, 1968); Maryland Petition Committee v. Johnson, 391 F.2d 933 (4th Cir., March 21, 1968).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM:

In this Dyer Act case, the only question presented on appeal is whether or not defendant Eskridge was sufficiently identified as the driver of the stolen motor vehicle. 18 U.S.C. § 2312. The testimony of three witnesses tends to establish identification. Efforts of defense counsel to cast doubt upon the accuracy of identification presented, of course, a question for the jury, but no question of law is presented for our decision. It is not suggested that the use of photographs was so “impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.” Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 384, 88 S.Ct. 967, 971, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247, 1253 (1968). Nor could it be on the facts of this case. We think the appeal is frivolous and accordingly dismiss without allowing oral argument. Fed.R.Cr.P. 39(a). See United States v. Gregg, 393 F.2d 722 (4th Cir., April 2, 1968); Maryland Petition Committee v. Johnson, 391 F.2d 933 (4th Cir., March 21, 1968).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

395 F.2d 751, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-elijah-eskridge-ca4-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack