William L. Alexander v. United States

318 F.2d 274, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 303, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5476
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedApril 25, 1963
Docket17291
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 318 F.2d 274 (William L. Alexander v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
William L. Alexander v. United States, 318 F.2d 274, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 303, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5476 (D.C. Cir. 1963).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was indicted on four counts: Count 1 for first degree murder of James Smith; Count 2 for assault with intent to kill Louis Smith; Count 3, assault with a dangerous weapon on Raymond Allen; and Count 4, carrying a pistol without a license. He was found guilty as charged. The jury was unable to agree on the death penalty and appellant was sentenced by the court to life imprisonment on the murder count, three to nine years on Count 2, two to six years on Count 3 and one year, on Count 4, all sentences to run concurrently.

The only claims urged on appeal relate to appellant’s mental capacity at the time of the offenses. Before trial he was examined at St. Elizabeths Hospital pursuant to order of the court. At trial he produced no expert testimony that he suffered any mental disease; only his own testimony and that of his mother was offered on this claim. The issue of criminal responsibility raised by defendant was submitted to the jury in an instruction which is not now challenged, and the jury on adequate evidence resolved the issue against defendant.

It is contended that the testimony of a psychiatrist from the staff of St. Elizabeths Hospital, who testified in rebuttal, should not have been received because her testimony was based on examination of hospital reports and files together with what she had observed of the appellant at a staff conference with other experts. Appellant argues that the expert did not personally interrogate him and that because of this omission there was no “examination.” The character and extent of the examination goes to the weight and not to the admissibility of such evidence, and its weight was for the jury. Carey v. United States, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 300, 296 F.2d 422 (1961) ; Jenkins v. United States, 113 U.S.App.D.C. 300, 307 F.2d 637 (1962).

Appellant was represented by experienced counsel both in the District Court and on this appeal. And our examination of the record in light of the contentions reveals no error which would warrant disturbing the judgment of conviction.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Matter of Samuels
507 A.2d 150 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1986)
State v. Pendry
227 S.E.2d 210 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1976)
United States v. Robinson
2 M.J. 1241 (U S Air Force Court of Military Review, 1976)
Smith v. State
285 N.E.2d 275 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1972)
Dale Estin Birdsell v. United States
346 F.2d 775 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
Albert Houston Carter v. United States
325 F.2d 697 (Fifth Circuit, 1963)
William L. Alexander v. United States
318 F.2d 274 (D.C. Circuit, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
318 F.2d 274, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 303, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-l-alexander-v-united-states-cadc-1963.