United States v. Travis Stanley Hamilton

444 F.2d 81, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9674
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 10, 1971
Docket30945
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 444 F.2d 81 (United States v. Travis Stanley Hamilton) 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. Travis Stanley Hamilton, 444 F.2d 81, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9674 (5th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal from conviction for possession of counterfeit bills in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 472, appellant raises numerous issues, all of which we have considered.

The court did not err in refusing defendant’s requested charge on entrapment. Pierce v. United States, 414 F.2d 163 (5th Cir.1969).

Appellant was not given a preliminary hearing, although there is evidence that he requested one, but subsequently he was indicted by the grand jury. This was not reversible error. United States v. Coley and Scogin, 441 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir., 1971).

Probable cause for appellant’s arrest without a warrant was more than sufficient, so there was no error in denying the motion to suppress. In fact this contention approaches being frivolous.

Claims of error based on denial of a mistrial on the ground that one juror inadvertently saw appellant brought into the courtroom in handcuffs and before the cuffs were removed, denial of motion for judgment of acquittal, and refusal to require the prosecutor to furnish to appellant a statement by a government witness, all are so lacking in merit as to require no discussion.

The trial judge instructed the jury at unusual length, and with great care and precision, on reasonable doubt. In one sentence of a reasonable doubt charge several pages long the court used language which only a few days before the Supreme Court of Mississippi had condemned in Pryor v. Mississippi, 239 So.2d 911 (1970). Without regard to whether the district judge would be bound by Mississippi precedent, we have considered the charge as a whole and find that the language employed did not constitute reversible error.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Com. v. Williams, E.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2019
Doss v. State
882 So. 2d 176 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2004)
Anthony Doss v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court, 1993
United States v. Al Taylor
562 F.2d 1345 (Second Circuit, 1977)
Commonwealth v. Evans
348 A.2d 92 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Commonwealth v. Mayhugh
336 A.2d 379 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Rush v. State
301 So. 2d 297 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1974)
James Edward Kennedy v. Harold J. Cardwell, Warden
487 F.2d 101 (Sixth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Sperling
362 F. Supp. 909 (S.D. New York, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
444 F.2d 81, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-travis-stanley-hamilton-ca5-1971.