From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Tempone

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 11, 1943
136 F.2d 538 (2d Cir. 1943)

Opinion

No. 295.

June 11, 1943.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

Sam Tempone was convicted of unlawfully possessing narcotics, 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 173, 174, and marihuana cigarettes, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 2593, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Abraham Solomon, of New York City, for appellant.

Mathias F. Correa, U.S. Atty., of New York City (Arthur H. Taylor, Asst. U.S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before SWAN, CHASE, and CLARK, Circuit Judges.


A jury having been duly waived, the appellant was tried before the district judge and found guilty. The only contested issue was whether he had voluntarily consented to the search of his bedroom where the narcotic agents discovered the narcotics and marihuana cigarettes upon which the indictment was based. Three agents testified that he had; the appellant testified to the contrary. The trial judge accepted the testimony of the agents. Hence the appeal raises only a question of the credibility of witnesses. The record discloses nothing which would justify a reversal on such an issue. See United States v. Jankowski, 2 Cir., 28 F.2d 800, 802; Marsh v. United States, 2 Cir., 29 F.2d 172, 173, certiorari denied 279 U.S. 849, 49 S.Ct. 346, 73 L.Ed. 992; United States v. Bianco, 2 Cir., 96 F.2d 97, 98; United States v. Adelman, 2 Cir., 107 F.2d 497, 499; De Lapp v. United States, 8 Cir., 53 F.2d 627, certiorari denied 284 U.S. 684, 52 S.Ct. 200, 76 L.Ed. 577.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Tempone

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 11, 1943
136 F.2d 538 (2d Cir. 1943)
Case details for

United States v. Tempone

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES v. TEMPONE

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Jun 11, 1943

Citations

136 F.2d 538 (2d Cir. 1943)

Citing Cases

United States v. Siegel

As to the taking of the letters, it will suffice to say that the evidence amply supports the court's finding…