Harold Franklin Smith v. United States
Opinion
The appellant was convicted of illegal possession of moonshine whiskey. On appeal he urges that the evidence was insufficient for a conviction and that an erroneous charge was given on circumstantial evidence. The evidence of guilt was more than required. Atkins v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 240 F.2d 849. On even less evidence the conviction would be sustained since no motion for a directed verdict of acquittal was made. Demos v. United States, 5 Cir., 1953, 205 F.2d 596, certiorari denied 346 U.S. 873, 74 S.Ct. 123, 98 L.Ed. 382. The district court limited the cross-examination of a government witness regarding an unrelated incident remote in time and place. No abuse of discretion appears. The refusal to give a requested charge on circumstantial evidence is assigned as error. The charge was properly refused since an adequate instruction was given. Gregory v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 253 F.2d 104. Other questions raised are without merit and need not be discussed. The judgment of the district court is
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Harold Franklin SMITH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
- Status
- Published