United States v. William Phillip Taylor, AKA William Joseph Findley

Fifth Circuit

United States v. William Phillip Taylor, AKA William Joseph Findley

480 F.2d 618, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 9453

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 12, 1973

Docket73-1041

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 480 F.2d 618 (United States v. William Phillip Taylor, AKA William Joseph Findley) 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. William Phillip Taylor, AKA William Joseph Findley, 480 F.2d 618, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 9453 (5th Cir. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted on two counts of threatening the president of the United States with bodily harm. 18 U.S.C.A. § 871. 1

We find no error either in form or substance in the jury selection method used by the district court in this case. It was not error to deny the motion for acquittal on the basis of appellant’s lack of sanity. 2 The record does not make out a case of compulsory denial of process in obtaining witnesses for the defense nor a denial of the right to speedy trial. It is urged that the court erred in *619 not sending various exhibits to the jury room for use in the jury deliberation. There was no request that this be done. In any event, even if there had been a request, whether to grant or deny the request would have been for the sound discretion of the district court. It follows that no error was committed in this connection. See United States v. Stone, 5 Cir., 1973, 472 F.2d 909. Moreover, we find no error in denying appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Affirmed.

1

. He was sentenced to confinement at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri for treatment.

2

. See Taylor v. United States, 5 Cir., 1964, 329 F.2d 384, for some background on appellant’s mental problems.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted on two counts of threatening the president of the United States with bodily harm. 18 U.S.C.A. § 871. 1

We find no error either in form or substance in the jury selection method used by the district court in this case. It was not error to deny the motion for acquittal on the basis of appellant’s lack of sanity. 2 The record does not make out a case of compulsory denial of process in obtaining witnesses for the defense nor a denial of the right to speedy trial. It is urged that the court erred in *619 not sending various exhibits to the jury room for use in the jury deliberation. There was no request that this be done. In any event, even if there had been a request, whether to grant or deny the request would have been for the sound discretion of the district court. It follows that no error was committed in this connection. See United States v. Stone, 5 Cir., 1973, 472 F.2d 909. Moreover, we find no error in denying appellant’s motion for a new trial.

Affirmed.

1

. He was sentenced to confinement at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri for treatment.

2

. See Taylor v. United States, 5 Cir., 1964, 329 F.2d 384, for some background on appellant’s mental problems.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

480 F.2d 618, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 9453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-william-phillip-taylor-aka-william-joseph-findley-ca5-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack