U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1958

Cecil v. United States

Cecil v. United States
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided February 27, 1958 · No. 13812
254 F.2d 773; 103 U.S. App. D.C. 70 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Benedict P. Cottone, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) for appellants. Mr. Ezekiel G. Stoddard, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) entered an appearance for appellant in No. 13,816. Mr. William R. Perlik, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellant in No. 13,816., Mr. Harry T. Alexander, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Lewis Carroll and Joel D. Blackwell, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.

Cecil v. United States

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

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.

Appellants were indicted, tried and convicted of the crimes of housebreaking and robbery.

Counsel appointed by this court has conscientiously examined the record and has presented all questions about which some contention could reasonably be made. He has pressed upon us four points admittedly not raised in the District Court1 but which he asks us to consider under the provisions of Rule 52(b), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A.2

We have carefully examined the record and find no error affecting substantial rights; nor do we, in this case, see any reason to invoke our discretionary function under Rule 52(b).

Affirmed.

. Appellant at the trial level was represented by counsel of Ms own choosing.

. “Plain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court.”

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.