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
Harris v. United States
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. - 215 F.2d 32
Argued June 4, 1954 Decided June 17, 1954
Mr. James J. Laughlin, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Albert J. Ahern, Jr., and John J. Simonetta, Washington, D. C., were on the briefs, for appellant. Mr. Jesse H. Chessin, Washington, D. C., entered an appearance for appellant in No. 11713.
Mr. Lewis A. Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Leo A. Rover, U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., was on the briefs, for appellee. Messrs. William R. Glendon and William J. Peck, Asst. U. S. Attys. at the time the record was filed, Washington, D. C., entered appearances for appellee in No. 11713. Mr. Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., entered an appearance for appellee in No. 12036.
Before PRETTYMAN, FAHY and DANAHER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was indicted, tried before a jury, convicted, and sentenced upon a charge of grand larceny. He appealed from the conviction. Later he filed in the District Court a motion for a new trial on the basis of alleged newly discovered evidence. The motion was denied by that court, and he appealed from the denial. The two appeals were consolidated for argument and decision in this court.
We have examined the contentions made in behalf of appellant and the record in respect thereto. We find no error affecting his substantial rights.
Affirmed.