U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1960

Marie A. Kelley v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided February 11, 1960 · Ashington, Danaher, Burger

275 F.2d 10; 107 U.S. App. D.C. 122; 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 5403 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Murray Preston (appointed by the District Court), Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. Richard H. Mayfield, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellant., Mr. Arthur J. McLaughlin, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

17 later published cases cite this decision.

Joseph E. Lewis v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1964)
Robert E. Green v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1967)
United States v. Winston Massiah, Mitchell Anfield, Leonard Royal Aiken and Icky Thorn (2d Cir. 1962)
United States v. Joseph W. Bailey, United States of America v. David Sloan (D.C. Cir. 1975)
Tipton v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1974)
State v. Williams (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1974)
David M. Robinson v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1972)
State v. Russell (Ariz. 1972)
United States v. Eli Ellis Gilbert (10th Cir. 1971)
United States v. Robert E. Barcella (1st Cir. 1970)
United States v. Harry J. Rybicki (6th Cir. 1968)
United States v. Herbert Winfield (2d Cir. 1965)
United States v. Albert Thomas (2d Cir. 1965)
Kenneth Willis v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1960)
State v. Latina (Ohio Ct. App. 1984)
State v. Cameron (N.C. 1973)
State v. Allen (Me. 1972)

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.

This appellant was charged with violation of the federal narcotics statutes, the first count being based upon 26 U.S.C. § 4705(a), the second upon 26 U.S.C. § 4704(a) and the third upon 21 U.S.C.A. § 174. 1 She was acquitted as to the third count but was convicted and sentenced to serve five years on the first count and to serve twenty months to five years on the second count. This appeal followed.

We are satisfied that there was no error in the trial leading to the conviction on the second count. That judgment is therefore affirmed.

As to the first count (selling narcotics), the Government offered evidence that the appellant was asked by a plainclothes policeman to purchase narcotics for him; that he gave her money; that she went to a certain house where a seller of drugs was said to live; and that she later handed the officer a packet containing drugs. With the case in that posture, it became essential that the jury be instructed as to the elements necessary to' establish a sale by the appellant. 2 No such instruction was given. On that ground and without reaching other points raised, we hold that the court erred in failing to grant appellant’s timely motion for a new trial.

Affirmed as to the second count. Reversed as to the first count.

. These sections of the Code, (1958), denounce three separate offenses. Gore v. United States, 1958, 357 U.S. 386, 78 S.Ct. 1280, 2 L.Ed.2d 1405, affirming 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 315, 244 F.2d 763. Cf. Harris v. United States, 1959, 359 U.S. 19, 79 S.Ct. 560, 3 L.Ed.2d 597.

. No evidence was offered that appellant had bartered, exchanged, or given away narcotic drugs. Cf. 26 U.S.C. § 4705(a) (1958).

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