United States v. Horace Lemar Edwards and Ronald Clifton

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Horace Lemar Edwards and Ronald Clifton

447 F.2d 147, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8349

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 25, 1971

Docket30601

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 447 F.2d 147 (United States v. Horace Lemar Edwards and Ronald Clifton) 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

United States v. Horace Lemar Edwards and Ronald Clifton, 447 F.2d 147, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8349 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

A jury convicted Horace Lemar Edwards of unlawfully carrying a pistol and of armed robbery on a military reservation. The same jury convicted Ronald Clifton on two counts of robbery at the same location as well as unlawfully carrying a pistol thereon, 18 U.S.C., § 13; Art. 1408 Vernon’s Ann. Texas Penal Code. We reverse, and remand for a new trial.

The case for the prosecution rested upon identification furnished by the victims of the alleged robberies and upon the seizure of the weapons when the defendants were arrested. The defense was an alibi.

Edwards and Clifton seek reversal on the following grounds: (1) because Edwards inadvertently entered a plea of guilty to the weapon charge in the presence of the jury; (2) the defendants were not allowed the correct number of peremptory challenges in the selection of the jury; (3) Edwards was denied his request for a polygraph examination; (4) there was no probable cause for the arrest of the defendants, which lead to the discovery of the weapons in question; and (5) the trial judge committed plain error in certain of his charges to the jury.

As to the instructions given the jury this case is almost completely identical to the situation existing in United States v. Dillion, 5 Cir., 1971, 446 F.2d 598.

Dillon is, therefore, controlling. Reversal for a new trial cannot be avoided.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

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

SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

A jury convicted Horace Lemar Edwards of unlawfully carrying a pistol and of armed robbery on a military reservation. The same jury convicted Ronald Clifton on two counts of robbery at the same location as well as unlawfully carrying a pistol thereon, 18 U.S.C., § 13; Art. 1408 Vernon’s Ann. Texas Penal Code. We reverse, and remand for a new trial.

The case for the prosecution rested upon identification furnished by the victims of the alleged robberies and upon the seizure of the weapons when the defendants were arrested. The defense was an alibi.

Edwards and Clifton seek reversal on the following grounds: (1) because Edwards inadvertently entered a plea of guilty to the weapon charge in the presence of the jury; (2) the defendants were not allowed the correct number of peremptory challenges in the selection of the jury; (3) Edwards was denied his request for a polygraph examination; (4) there was no probable cause for the arrest of the defendants, which lead to the discovery of the weapons in question; and (5) the trial judge committed plain error in certain of his charges to the jury.

As to the instructions given the jury this case is almost completely identical to the situation existing in United States v. Dillion, 5 Cir., 1971, 446 F.2d 598.

Dillon is, therefore, controlling. Reversal for a new trial cannot be avoided.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

447 F.2d 147, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-horace-lemar-edwards-and-ronald-clifton-ca5-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack