Willie Ferrell Davis v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Willie Ferrell Davis v. United States

363 F.2d 954, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 5336

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJuly 27, 1966

Docket22107

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 363 F.2d 954 (Willie Ferrell Davis 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

Willie Ferrell Davis v. United States, 363 F.2d 954, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 5336 (5th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

By this appeal, from conviction on five counts of possession and sale of illicit whiskey in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a), appellant raises two contentions, neither of which is meritorious.

First, recognizing that the record is silent as to whether appellant, at or subsequent to his arrest, specifically requested permission to seek counsel or his family, bondsman or others, he nevertheless asserts that he was not in *955 formed of his right to the advice of counsel prior to his making a written statement. On the contrary, however, the record clearly shows an oral warning by the interrogating officer as well as a similar warning in the first paragraph of appellant’s written statement. Second, the defense of entrapment, which was not raised at the trial, is clearly untenable. The agents simply caught him red-handed in the act of delivering large quantities of illicit whiskey.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

By this appeal, from conviction on five counts of possession and sale of illicit whiskey in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5205(a) (2) and 5604(a), appellant raises two contentions, neither of which is meritorious.

First, recognizing that the record is silent as to whether appellant, at or subsequent to his arrest, specifically requested permission to seek counsel or his family, bondsman or others, he nevertheless asserts that he was not in *955 formed of his right to the advice of counsel prior to his making a written statement. On the contrary, however, the record clearly shows an oral warning by the interrogating officer as well as a similar warning in the first paragraph of appellant’s written statement. Second, the defense of entrapment, which was not raised at the trial, is clearly untenable. The agents simply caught him red-handed in the act of delivering large quantities of illicit whiskey.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

363 F.2d 954, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 5336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-ferrell-davis-v-united-states-ca5-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack