Williams v. United States

265 F. 625, 1920 U.S. App. LEXIS 1464
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 29, 1920
DocketNo. 5437
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 265 F. 625 (Williams v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Williams v. United States, 265 F. 625, 1920 U.S. App. LEXIS 1464 (8th Cir. 1920).

Opinion

HOOK, Circuit Judge.

George Williams was convicted and sentenced for violating the White Slave Traffic Act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 825 [Comp. St. §§ 8812-8819]). The only complaint he makes in this court is of the admission at the trial of testimony that he borrowed a sum of money from the young woman in the case and had not repaid it. He urges that the testimony was not relevant to the question of his guilt, and that its admission was prejudicial.

[1,2] Whether prejudice results from the erroneous admission of evidence at a trial is a question that should not be considered abstractly or by way of detachment. The question is one of practical effect, when the trial as a whole and all the circumstances of the proofs are regarded. In the case before us the evidence of guilt, aside from that challenged, was overwhelming and undisputed. It was wholly that of the prosecution, and no denial or explanation of it was made in- defense. The guilt of the accused could not have appeared more conclusively, had he pleaded guilty in open court. It is manifest that he was not prejudiced by the admission of the testimony to which reference has-been made. This conclusion makes it unnecessary to consider whether the testimony was relevant or material.

The sentence is affirmed.

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

Related

Homer L. Blackwell v. United States
244 F.2d 423 (Eighth Circuit, 1957)
Saul Henry Davis, Jr. v. United States
229 F.2d 181 (Eighth Circuit, 1956)
Kamanosuke Yuge v. United States
127 F.2d 683 (Ninth Circuit, 1942)
Hewitt v. United States
110 F.2d 1 (Eighth Circuit, 1940)
Guy v. United States
107 F.2d 288 (D.C. Circuit, 1939)
Townsend v. United States
106 F.2d 273 (Third Circuit, 1939)
Ross v. United States
103 F.2d 600 (Ninth Circuit, 1939)
Morgan v. United States
98 F.2d 473 (Eighth Circuit, 1938)
United States v. Breen
96 F.2d 782 (Second Circuit, 1938)
Wainer v. United States
82 F.2d 305 (Seventh Circuit, 1936)
Hartzell v. United States
72 F.2d 569 (Eighth Circuit, 1934)
Addis v. United States
62 F.2d 329 (Tenth Circuit, 1932)
Kroska v. United States
51 F.2d 330 (Eighth Circuit, 1931)
Lewis v. United States
38 F.2d 406 (Ninth Circuit, 1930)
Armstrong v. United States
16 F.2d 62 (Ninth Circuit, 1926)
Simpson v. United States
289 F. 188 (Ninth Circuit, 1923)
Donegan v. United States
287 F. 641 (Second Circuit, 1922)
Smith v. United States
267 F. 665 (Eighth Circuit, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
265 F. 625, 1920 U.S. App. LEXIS 1464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-united-states-ca8-1920.