United States v. James Edward Weeks

Fifth Circuit

United States v. James Edward Weeks

487 F.2d 342, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 6900

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 21, 1973

Docket73-2362

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 487 F.2d 342 (United States v. James Edward Weeks) 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. James Edward Weeks, 487 F.2d 342, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 6900 (5th Cir. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The principal issue raised in this appeal is whether in-court identifications were tainted by pre-trial photographic displays. The record contains substantial evidence that the photographic identification procedure did not “give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification,” Simmons v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 377, 384, 88 S.Ct. 967, 971, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247, 1253, and that the in-court identifications were based on observation of the appellant during the crime. We need not reach this issue, however, because it was not preserved for appeal by appropriate objection during the trial. The admission of the in-court identification being free of plain error, and appellant’s other points of appeal being without merit, the judgment of the court below is therefore

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The principal issue raised in this appeal is whether in-court identifications were tainted by pre-trial photographic displays. The record contains substantial evidence that the photographic identification procedure did not “give rise to a very substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification,” Simmons v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 377, 384, 88 S.Ct. 967, 971, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247, 1253, and that the in-court identifications were based on observation of the appellant during the crime. We need not reach this issue, however, because it was not preserved for appeal by appropriate objection during the trial. The admission of the in-court identification being free of plain error, and appellant’s other points of appeal being without merit, the judgment of the court below is therefore

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

487 F.2d 342, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 6900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-james-edward-weeks-ca5-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack