United States v. Lyda Loraine Harber

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Lyda Loraine Harber

523 F.2d 801, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11888

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 17, 1975

Docket74-3753

StatusPublished

This text of 523 F.2d 801 (United States v. Lyda Loraine Harber) 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. Lyda Loraine Harber, 523 F.2d 801, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11888 (5th Cir. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from convictions of causing to be transported in interstate commerce falsely made and forged securities and transporting and causing to be transported in interstate commerce forged common stock certificates in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314.

Appellant has urged as reversible error the fact that the trial court required *802 her to be present during a pre-trial hearing out of the presence of the jury where a prosecution witness was asked to identify the photographic spread previously shown her by the FBI from which she had identified appellant. She was also asked to indicate which of the pictures she had earlier selected as the photograph of the person who had handled certain transactions with her. Because this hearing was not held for the purpose of identifying appellant but rather in order to comply with the dictates of United States v. Sutherland, 428 F.2d 1152 (5th Cir. 1970), we hold there was no reversible error in requiring appellant’s presence. The Supreme Court in Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 383, 88 S.Ct. 967, 970, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247 (1968), stated that: “This is a claim which must be evaluated in light of the totality of surrounding circumstances.”

We have considered appellant’s other points of error and find them to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from convictions of causing to be transported in interstate commerce falsely made and forged securities and transporting and causing to be transported in interstate commerce forged common stock certificates in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314.

Appellant has urged as reversible error the fact that the trial court required *802 her to be present during a pre-trial hearing out of the presence of the jury where a prosecution witness was asked to identify the photographic spread previously shown her by the FBI from which she had identified appellant. She was also asked to indicate which of the pictures she had earlier selected as the photograph of the person who had handled certain transactions with her. Because this hearing was not held for the purpose of identifying appellant but rather in order to comply with the dictates of United States v. Sutherland, 428 F.2d 1152 (5th Cir. 1970), we hold there was no reversible error in requiring appellant’s presence. The Supreme Court in Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 383, 88 S.Ct. 967, 970, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247 (1968), stated that: “This is a claim which must be evaluated in light of the totality of surrounding circumstances.”

We have considered appellant’s other points of error and find them to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

523 F.2d 801, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lyda-loraine-harber-ca5-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack