From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Matthews

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 18, 1972
460 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1972)

Opinion

No. 71-3360. Summary Calendar.

Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409.

May 18, 1972.

Theodore E. Smith, Atlanta, Ga. (Court appointed), for James E. Matthews.

Edward Bob Brooks, Atlanta, Ga. (Court appointed), for Stanley Ward.

John W. Stokes, U.S. Atty., Richard H. Still, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellee.

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

Before BELL, DYER and CLARK, Circuit Judges.



Appellants were convicted after jury trial of violating 18 U.S.C.A. § 1792 in that they conveyed from place to place within the United States penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, an explosive device designed to kill, injure or disable officers, agents, employees and inmates of such institution. We affirm.

There is no merit in the assignments of error having to do with the failure to continue the trial and in the number of jury strikes allowed appellants in selecting the jurors and the alternate juror. The assignment of error arising from the use of a film showing a test of an explosive device substantially similar to the device in issue is also without merit. The weight of this evidence was for the jury under a proper cautionary instruction which was given. The contention that there was no proof that the penitentiary in question was a federal penal and correctional institution is unsupported.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Matthews

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 18, 1972
460 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1972)
Case details for

United States v. Matthews

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. JAMES E. MATTHEWS AND…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 18, 1972

Citations

460 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1972)

Citing Cases

Ward v. United States

This is an appeal from a denial of a § 2255 motion to vacate judgment of conviction under 18 U.S.C.A. § 1792…

United States v. Ward

This pro se § 2255 motion represents the second time the Appellant Ward has sought post conviction relief…