Winfield Frank Leach v. Virginia H. Wolfe and Earl Wolfe

Fifth Circuit

Winfield Frank Leach v. Virginia H. Wolfe and Earl Wolfe

397 F.2d 814

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 22, 1968·No. 25264·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Construing the charge of the trial court as a whole, we conclude that the inclusion by the trial court of the sentence selected for attack by appellant did not amount to prejudicial error.

The Judgment is affirmed.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM:

It is ordered that the petition for rehearing filed in the above styled and numbered cause be, and the same is, hereby denied. •*-

Judge CLAYTON was unable to participate in the consideration or decision of this motion.

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

PER CURIAM:

Construing the charge of the trial court as a whole, we conclude that the inclusion by the trial court of the sentence selected for attack by appellant did not amount to prejudicial error.

The Judgment is affirmed.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM:

It is ordered that the petition for rehearing filed in the above styled and numbered cause be, and the same is, hereby denied. •*-

Judge CLAYTON was unable to participate in the consideration or decision of this motion.

Winfield Frank Leach v. Virginia H. Wolfe and Earl Wolfe, 397 F.2d 814 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

397 F.2d 814 (Winfield Frank Leach v. Virginia H. Wolfe and Earl Wolfe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.