United States v. John William Bullock

Fifth Circuit

United States v. John William Bullock

458 F.2d 37, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9824

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 1972

Docket71-3470

StatusPublished

This text of 458 F.2d 37 (United States v. John William Bullock) 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. John William Bullock, 458 F.2d 37, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9824 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed. 1a See Local Rule 21. 2a

1a

. Appellant contended that: 1) the evidence was insufficient for the jury to have inferred the existence of an unlawful agreement; 2) there was improper venue and a lack of jurisdiction; 3) the charge did not sufficiently instruct the jury to consider each defendant separately; and 4) a preliminary instruction to the jury that once there is some evidence of conspiracy, hearsay of co-conspirators may be admissible, amounted to an instruction, as a matter of law, that there was evidence of a conspiracy. We have considered all these specifications of error and find them to be without merit.

2a

. See NLRB v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 430 F.2d 966 (5 Cir. 1970).

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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed. 1a See Local Rule 21. 2a

1a

. Appellant contended that: 1) the evidence was insufficient for the jury to have inferred the existence of an unlawful agreement; 2) there was improper venue and a lack of jurisdiction; 3) the charge did not sufficiently instruct the jury to consider each defendant separately; and 4) a preliminary instruction to the jury that once there is some evidence of conspiracy, hearsay of co-conspirators may be admissible, amounted to an instruction, as a matter of law, that there was evidence of a conspiracy. We have considered all these specifications of error and find them to be without merit.

2a

. See NLRB v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 430 F.2d 966 (5 Cir. 1970).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

458 F.2d 37, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-william-bullock-ca5-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack