359 F.2d 852 - Moore v. United States — 359 F.2d 852

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 1983

9 federal appellate ·

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.

¶1Robert H. Cleveland, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.

¶2Fred S. Clark, Asst. U. S. Atty., Donald H. Fraser, U. S. Atty., Savannah, Ga., for appellee.

¶3Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, THORNBERRY, Circuit Judge, and LYNNE, District Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5 The principal contention in this appeal from appellant’s conviction for a violation of the Dyer Act is that appellant was without adequate representation of counsel. This point was not raised before the district court, and the record does not present sufficient facts for a determination of this question on direct appeal.1 Appellee seeks to supplement the record by submitting affidavits at*853tached to its brief. Affidavits outside the record, however, may not be considered by this Court. Smith v. United States, 5th Cir.1965, 343 F.2d 539, 541; Roberts v. United States, 5th Cir.1963, 325 F.2d 290.

¶6The contention that the evidence was insufficient to warrant submission of the case to the jury is clearly without merit.

¶7The judgment is affirmed, without prejudice to the right of the appellant to present his contention involving representation of counsel by other proceedings available to him. See Tyree v. United States, 5th Cir.1965, 351 F.2d 611.