United States v. Siler Drug Store Company, Inc., Perry H. Siler and James Sutton

Sixth Circuit

United States v. Siler Drug Store Company, Inc., Perry H. Siler and James Sutton

376 F.2d 89, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6950

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided March 29, 1967·No. 17009_1·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The corporate defendant, its president and an employee were found guilty of the offense of selling legend drugs without prescription in violation of 21 U.S.C. 353 (b) (1) and 21 U.S.C. 331 (k). The corporation and its president were convicted on ten counts, the employee on eight. The corporation was fined $500 on each count, and each individual defendant was sentenced to one year in prison on each count, to be served concurrently.

As grounds for reversal, defendants contend that the trial court abused its discretion in not granting a continuance, that improper cross-examination was permitted, and that it was improper to hold both the corporation and its officer liable for the acts of the employee.

Upon consideration, we find these contentions to be without merit, and we therefore affirm the decision of the trial court.

Attention of counsel is directed to Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, with regard to the power of the trial court to effect a reduction in sentence. See also United States v. West Coast News Company, 6 Cir. (1966), 357 F.2d 855 at 865.

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

PER CURIAM.

The corporate defendant, its president and an employee were found guilty of the offense of selling legend drugs without prescription in violation of 21 U.S.C. 353 (b) (1) and 21 U.S.C. 331 (k). The corporation and its president were convicted on ten counts, the employee on eight. The corporation was fined $500 on each count, and each individual defendant was sentenced to one year in prison on each count, to be served concurrently.

As grounds for reversal, defendants contend that the trial court abused its discretion in not granting a continuance, that improper cross-examination was permitted, and that it was improper to hold both the corporation and its officer liable for the acts of the employee.

Upon consideration, we find these contentions to be without merit, and we therefore affirm the decision of the trial court.

Attention of counsel is directed to Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, with regard to the power of the trial court to effect a reduction in sentence. See also United States v. West Coast News Company, 6 Cir. (1966), 357 F.2d 855 at 865.

United States v. Siler Drug Store Company, Inc., Perry H. Siler and James Sutton, 376 F.2d 89, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6950 (6th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

376 F.2d 89 (United States v. Siler Drug Store Company, Inc., Perry H. Siler and James Sutton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related