Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

255 F.2d 896

Docket Nos. 14185, 14186.

Williams v. United States

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • Thomas WILLIAMSv.UNITED STATES of America
  • Lindsey McDANIELv.UNITED STATES of America

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued May 12, 1958. Decided May 22, 1958.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1958-05-22

2 counsel of record

Relies on United States v. McDaniel

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1958-05-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 1970

11 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

170195819601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Albert J. Ahern, Jr., Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. James J. Laughlin was on the brief, for appellants.

Mr. Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U.S. Atty., Lewis Carroll and Frederick G. Smithson, Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before FAHY, WASHINGTON and DANAHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The appellants, together with one Jackie J. Floyd, were indicted for common law murder, murder in perpetration of a felony, and robbery. Floyd has not been tried because of his mental condition. Appellants were tried only on the counts for murder in the perpetration of a felony, and for robbery, the count charging premeditated murder having been dismissed as to them. Two trials by jury resulted in mistrials, the first because the jury was unable to agree on a verdict and the second because a juror was unable to complete the deliberations. A third trial followed before a district judge alone, trial by jury having been duly waived. The judge acquitted appellants of the murder charge and convicted them of robbery, as aiders and abettors rather than as principals. It is from the resulting judgments that they appeal.1

¶2

Appellants question the admissibility of certain evidence, the sufficiency of the evidence, and the validity of the robbery conviction on the ground of its alleged inconsistency with their acquittal of the charge of murder in the perpetration of the robbery. Upon consideration of these and all other questions raised we find no basis for reversal and the judgments are

¶3

Affirmed.

1

Appellants were tried together. They took separate appeals from the separate judgments, but the two cases were here consolidated for briefing and argument

/255/f2d/896 · .json · Public domain