U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1959

L. T. Montford, A. Z. Handford and J. C. Hamilton v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided November 23, 1959 · Rives, Tuttle, Jones

272 F.2d 395; 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3040 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Vance Custer, Bainbridge, Ga., Zach H. Douglas, Jacksonville, Fla., Sol Altman, Charles F. Johnson, Thomasville, Ga., for defendants, J. G. Hamilton and L. T. Montford., W. Howard Fowler, Asst. U. S. Atty., Frank O. Evans, U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. Benjamin Franklin Sherriff, Harles Junior Fyffe, A/K/A Joe Fyffe, Randall Guy Brady and Albert Mason (5th Cir. 1977)
United States v. Pete Arendale (5th Cir. 1971)

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed. In the light of the argument by counsel for the appellants that the failure of the Government to call other witnesses shown to have had knowledge of the transactions would authorize the jury to infer that such witnesses would have testified favorably to appellants, it was not error for the United States Attorney, in his argument, to say: “The processes of this court are available to these defendants, and had they wanted one of these witnesses, right there they sit for them.” There is nothing in this Court’s decision in McClanahan v. United States, 5 Cir., 230 F.2d 919, 925, that conflicts with what we hold here.

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