United States of America-Plaintiff v. Bobby Ross Young-Defendant
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- United States v. Leonard Luxenberg, United States of America v. George Zimmerman (6th Cir. 1967)
- United States v. Willie L. Wade (6th Cir. 1966)
- United States v. Robert Grimes (6th Cir. 1964)
- United States v. Fred Michael Conti (6th Cir. 1964)
- United States v. Albert Baxter Thomas (6th Cir. 1962)
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
ORDER.
Following trial by jury, appellant was found guilty of the unlawful possession of a quantity of distilled spirits, in violation of the provisions of Section 5008 (b), Internal Revenue Code, 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 5008(b). He received a sentence of imprisonment for a period of four years.
On this appeal he contends that the Government’s evidence on the issue of possession was circumstantial, was not sufficient to remove every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt, and that the Court accordingly erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal and submitting the case to the jury.
Circumstantial evidence, if strong enough to convince a jury of defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, is sufficient to take a case to the jury and sustain a verdict. United States v. Comer, 6 Cir., 288 F.2d 174. It is not necessary that it be such evidence as would remove every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt. Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 139-140, 75 S.Ct. 127, 99 L.Ed. 150.
The Court, having considered the evidence, the briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, is of the opinion that the evidence was sufficient to take the case to the jury and sustain the verdict.
It is ordered that the judgment be affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.