United States v. Paul David Sutton, Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr.

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Paul David Sutton, Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr.

455 F.2d 974, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11448

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 7, 1972

Docket26717

StatusPublished

This text of 455 F.2d 974 (United States v. Paul David Sutton, Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. Paul David Sutton, Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr., 455 F.2d 974, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11448 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

455 F.2d 974

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Paul David SUTTON, Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr., Appellants.

Nos. 26715, 26717.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 7, 1972.

Lee A. Holley (argued), Seattle, Wash., for Paul David Sutton.

Max Gest (argued), Richard P. Fox, Los Angeles, Cal., for Lawrence Bernard Graham, Jr.

Lyn I. Goldberg, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Harry D. Steward, U. S. Atty., Stephen G. Nelson, Chief Crim. Div., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before CHAMBERS, KOELSCH and CARTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

The appellants from material outside the record make a showing that the main prosecuting witness may have testified falsely. This is a matter that can now be the subject of a motion for a new trial. We give no indication as to what the ruling should be.

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