Verner Caulk Harris and Verner Earl Harris v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Verner Caulk Harris and Verner Earl Harris v. United States

384 F.2d 363

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 24, 1967

Docket23975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 384 F.2d 363 (Verner Caulk Harris and Verner Earl Harris v. United States) 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

Verner Caulk Harris and Verner Earl Harris v. United States, 384 F.2d 363 (5th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellants, father and son, were convicted of possessing and selling bootleg whiskey in violation of 26 U.S. C.A. §§ 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1). They claim that they were entrapped by government agents but the record does not sustain such a claim. The trial court did not err in allowing evidence of prior convictions for credibility purposes nor is the claim made out that the court prejudiced appellants before the jury in the conduct of the trial.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellants, father and son, were convicted of possessing and selling bootleg whiskey in violation of 26 U.S. C.A. §§ 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a) (1). They claim that they were entrapped by government agents but the record does not sustain such a claim. The trial court did not err in allowing evidence of prior convictions for credibility purposes nor is the claim made out that the court prejudiced appellants before the jury in the conduct of the trial.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

384 F.2d 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/verner-caulk-harris-and-verner-earl-harris-v-united-states-ca5-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack