United States v. Robert Theodore Oakcrum

441 F.2d 1157
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 30, 1971
Docket71-1115
StatusPublished

This text of 441 F.2d 1157 (United States v. Robert Theodore Oakcrum) 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. Robert Theodore Oakcrum, 441 F.2d 1157 (5th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

441 F.2d 1157

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Robert Theodore OAKCRUM, Appellant.

No. 71-1115

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 30, 1971.

John F. Rutledge, Arlington, Va., on brief, for appellant.

Brian P. Gettings, U.S. Atty., and Gilbert K. Davis, Asst. U.S. Atty., on brief, for appellee.

Before BOREMAN, WINTER and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Theodore Oakcrum appeals from his convictions of possession and interstate transportation of a firearm ('a sawed-off shotgun') not registered under the National Firearms Act, in violation of 26 U.S.C. 5861(d) and (j). Upon appeal, Oakcrum contends: (1) that the registration provisions of the Act are an unconstitutional infringement upon the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to show possession or interstate transportation of the firearm in question; and (3) that the sentences were excessive

Appellant's constitutional challenge to the Act has been foreclosed by the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601, 91 S.Ct. 1112, 28 L.Ed.2d 356 (1971), wherein the Court held that the Act does not violate the self-incrimination provision of the Fifth Amendment.

We find no merit in appellant's other contentions. Clearly there was sufficient evidence to show possession and interstate transportation of the firearm. The sentences imposed were well within the statutory limits and there is no reason to disturb them as we perceive no abuse of discretion by the sentencing court.

Affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Freed
401 U.S. 601 (Supreme Court, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
441 F.2d 1157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-robert-theodore-oakcrum-ca5-1971.