From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Bottom

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 13, 1972
469 F.2d 95 (9th Cir. 1972)

Opinion

No. 72-1928.

September 13, 1972.

John J. Davids (argued), of Conklin, Davids Friedman, San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appellant.

John G. Milano, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), James L. Browning, Jr., U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Before CHAMBERS and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and BYRNE, District Judge.

Honorable William M. Byrne, Sr., United States District Judge, Central District of California, sitting by designation.


The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

We find there was no abuse of discretion in failing to issue a writ to bring a co-defendant before the court. An affidavit was filed on the date set for trial. The affidavit was wholly conclusory. Further, no excuse is given for the delay in making the request. It is not suggested that Bottom had just learned the whereabouts of the co-defendant. Further, the record would indicate that Bottom had known of the whereabouts of the other defendant.

The affidavit does not meet the test of Greenwell v. United States, 115 U.S. App.D.C. 108, 317 F.2d 108 (1963).


Summaries of

United States v. Bottom

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 13, 1972
469 F.2d 95 (9th Cir. 1972)
Case details for

United States v. Bottom

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. ANTHONY LEONARD BOTTOM…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 13, 1972

Citations

469 F.2d 95 (9th Cir. 1972)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Smith

Furthermore, unsupported and conclusory claims are not sufficient to show error. United States v. Bottom, 469…

United States v. Sims

Under the standard we have adopted, the trial court's discretion is limited to determining whether issuing…