From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ferguson v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 2, 1964
329 F.2d 923 (10th Cir. 1964)

Opinion

Nos. 7020, 7021.

April 2, 1964.

Judd L. Black, Oklahoma City, Okla., for appellants.

Jack R. Parr, Asst. U.S. Atty. (B. Andrew Potter, U.S. Atty., was with him on the brief), for appellee.

Before PICKETT, LEWIS and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges.


Appellants were tried jointly but were represented by individual counsel. The trial court's ruling that prosecution witnesses could be cross-examined by but one counsel constitutes plain error within the compulsion of Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Each defendant had the right to have non-repetitious cross-examination conducted on his behalf by his individual counsel and could not be required to have questions pertaining to his particular interests channeled through his co-defendant's counsel.

The opinion of the court heretofore filed, 307 F.2d 787, is withdrawn and the judgments are severally reversed with directions to grant new trials.


Summaries of

Ferguson v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Apr 2, 1964
329 F.2d 923 (10th Cir. 1964)
Case details for

Ferguson v. United States

Case Details

Full title:Waldo Kent FERGUSON, and Robert Lowell Rogers, Appellants, v. UNITED…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Apr 2, 1964

Citations

329 F.2d 923 (10th Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

United States v. Vespe

rdings inadmissible in a federal criminal trial because federal and not state law provides the standard…

United States v. Mills

The judge's action rather merits its own Sixth Amendment rule in accord with other rules based on the…