Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fla

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from a conviction for causing to be transported in interstate commerce, with fraudulent intent, a falsely made and forged check, knowing it to be falsely made and forged. 18 U.S.C.A. § 2314.

Under Rule 18 the Court has placed this case on the Summary Calendar for disposition without oral argument. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, pt. I; Floyd v. Resor, 5 Cir., 1969, 409 F.2d 714, 715, n. 2.

The refusal to grant a continuance at the request of appellant because of the absence of a defense witness was in the discretion of the trial court, and that discretion was not abused. Barnes v. United States, 374 F.2d 126 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 917, 88 S.Ct. 246, 19 L.Ed.2d 273 (1967). McShann v. United States, 38 F.2d 635 (5th Cir. 1930).

The court did not err in admitting the testimony of the witness Charles Leverett of admissions made to him by appellant concerning where appellant had secured checks of the type which he was charged with transporting, even though the admissions implied the checks had been stolen. Matthews v. United States, 5 Cir. 1969, 407 F.2d 1371, Mar. 3, 1969; Samora v. United States, 5 Cir. 1969, 406 F.2d 1095.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. PIERCE
(May 20, 1969)