U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 1930

Davis v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Decided February 5, 1930

38 F.2d 631; 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2371 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Orban Patterson, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellant., Roy St. Lewis, U. S. Atty., William Earl Wiles, Asst. U. S. Atty., and Herbert K. Hyde, Asst. U. S. Atty., all of Oklahoma City, Okl.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Hood v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)
Beach v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1945)
McShann v. United States (10th Cir. 1933)
Smith v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)
Flowers v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)
Oldham v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)
Imrie v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)
McShann v. United States (10th Cir. 1930)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted of a conspiracy to violate the Harrison Narcotic Act (26 USCA §§ 211, 691-707) and on four additional counts charging sales to a named purchaser “within Oklahoma County, in the Western District of Oklahoma.”

. The principal error assigned is that the indictment does not sufficiently describe the place of the commission of the offense. What we have said in Turk v. United States (C. C. A.) 38 P. 630, this day decided, controls this case.

It is further argued that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the conviction on the fifth count. We cannot consider this, because there is no bill of exceptions. Instead there is a literal transcript of all the proceedings' at the trial. Tingley v. United States (10 C. C. A.) 34 F.(2d) 1; Caldwell v. United States (10 C. C. A.) 36 F.(2d) 738, decided October 16, 1929.

Judgment is affirmed, and the mandate will issue forthwith.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.