United States v. Roy Harman

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Roy Harman

323 F.2d 650, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4060

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 4, 1963

Docket9039_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 323 F.2d 650 (United States v. Roy Harman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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. Roy Harman, 323 F.2d 650, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4060 (4th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Roy Harman was tried by a jury on a three-count indictment charging violation of U.S.C. Title 26, sections 5601(a) (4), 5601(a) (7) and 5604(a) (1), and was found guilty on all counts. The court imposed concurrent sentences of four years on each count. Although no exceptions were taken to the charge to the-jury, and no motion for a new trial was made, Harman contends that there were plain errors in the charge, affecting substantial rights, of which this court will take notice. Rule 52(b), F.R.Cr.P.

Errors in the charge were in part expressly, and in part tacitly, admitted by the United States. These consisted in failing to instruct the jury as to the law applicable to the respective counts, and in instructing the jury as to an inapplicable presumption. On the whole record substantial rights of the defendant were affected (United States v. Levy, 3 Cir., 1946, 153 F.2d 995; Morris v. United States, 9 Cir., 1946, 156 F.2d 525; United States v. Max, 3 Cir., 1946, 156 F.2d 13; United States v. McKenzie, 6 Cir., 1962, 301 F.2d 880). The judgment is reversed and the case remanded to the District Court for a new trial.

Harman also moved in this court for admission to bail pending appeal. In view of the present disposition of the case, and the nature of the remand, any application for bail should be directed to the District Court.

Reversed and remanded,

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

PER CURIAM.

Roy Harman was tried by a jury on a three-count indictment charging violation of U.S.C. Title 26, sections 5601(a) (4), 5601(a) (7) and 5604(a) (1), and was found guilty on all counts. The court imposed concurrent sentences of four years on each count. Although no exceptions were taken to the charge to the-jury, and no motion for a new trial was made, Harman contends that there were plain errors in the charge, affecting substantial rights, of which this court will take notice. Rule 52(b), F.R.Cr.P.

Errors in the charge were in part expressly, and in part tacitly, admitted by the United States. These consisted in failing to instruct the jury as to the law applicable to the respective counts, and in instructing the jury as to an inapplicable presumption. On the whole record substantial rights of the defendant were affected (United States v. Levy, 3 Cir., 1946, 153 F.2d 995; Morris v. United States, 9 Cir., 1946, 156 F.2d 525; United States v. Max, 3 Cir., 1946, 156 F.2d 13; United States v. McKenzie, 6 Cir., 1962, 301 F.2d 880). The judgment is reversed and the case remanded to the District Court for a new trial.

Harman also moved in this court for admission to bail pending appeal. In view of the present disposition of the case, and the nature of the remand, any application for bail should be directed to the District Court.

Reversed and remanded,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

323 F.2d 650, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-roy-harman-ca4-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack