United States v. Harry Henry Nash

Sixth Circuit

United States v. Harry Henry Nash

342 F.2d 326, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6169

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMarch 19, 1965

Docket15966

StatusPublished

This text of 342 F.2d 326 (United States v. Harry Henry Nash) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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. Harry Henry Nash, 342 F.2d 326, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6169 (6th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was found guilty by a jury and convicted upon three counts of a five-count indictment charging him with vio *327 lation of the White Slave Traffic Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2421. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on each count, the three sentences to run concurrently.

Appellant’s wife was a co-defendant on one count of the indictment in the trial court, and there was a mistrial as to her.

It is contended that the trial judge committed reversible error in refusing to grant appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal and in permitting certain questions to be propounded to appellant’s wife on cross examination concerning his and her associations and relationships with alleged prostitutes. It is further contended that this court erred in ordering stricken from appellant’s appendix an affidavit of false testimony made by the principal witness for the government, which affidavit was not a part of the record in the trial court.

We find the contentions of appellant to be without merit.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was found guilty by a jury and convicted upon three counts of a five-count indictment charging him with vio *327 lation of the White Slave Traffic Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2421. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on each count, the three sentences to run concurrently.

Appellant’s wife was a co-defendant on one count of the indictment in the trial court, and there was a mistrial as to her.

It is contended that the trial judge committed reversible error in refusing to grant appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal and in permitting certain questions to be propounded to appellant’s wife on cross examination concerning his and her associations and relationships with alleged prostitutes. It is further contended that this court erred in ordering stricken from appellant’s appendix an affidavit of false testimony made by the principal witness for the government, which affidavit was not a part of the record in the trial court.

We find the contentions of appellant to be without merit.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

342 F.2d 326, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-harry-henry-nash-ca6-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack