Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

327 F.2d 495

Docket No. 20466.

King v. United States

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

January 29, 1964.

Rehearing Denied March 3, 1964.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1964-01-29

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1971

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Fay v. Noia

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1964-01-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

John Gregg, Jackson, Miss., Hugh L. Bailey, Winona, Miss., for appellants.

H. M. Ray, U. S. Atty., Oxford, Miss., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and HUTCHESON and GEWIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

After careful consideration, we conclude that there is no substance in the grounds asserted for this appeal. Counsel took no exceptions to the charge of the court, thus failing to preserve any claim of error arising from the charge. We think it is plain that there is no basis for the contention here made that the trial court's comments on the evidence constituted substantial error against appellants.

¶2

The judgment is affirmed.

/327/f2d/495 · .json · Public domain