Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Medlin, v. United States.(two Cases).house, v. United States
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. - 207 F.2d 33
Argued June 29, 1953.Decided July 23, 1953.Petition for Rehearing Denied Oct. 12, 1953
[93 U.S.App.D.C. 65] Mr. James J. Laughlin, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Albert J. Ahern, Jr., Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellants.
Mr. E. Riley Casey, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Leo A. Rover, U.S. Atty., and Arthur D. Schaffer and William J. Peck, Asst. U.S. Attys., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee. Messrs. Charles M. Irelan, U.S. Atty., and Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., at the time the record was filed, also entered appearances for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, PRETTYMAN and WASHINGTON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The appellants were indicted and convicted of assault 'with a dangerous weapon, that is, shoes' on their feet. There was substantial evidence that each appellant kicked the complaining witness. He was seriously injured.
Appellants contend that shoes on feet are not dangerous weapons. We think it clear that they are, at least when they inflict serious injuries. Cf. Tatum v. United States, 71 App.D.C. 393, 110 F.2d 555. Appellants' other contentions do not require discussion.
Affirmed.