Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

397 F.2d 621

Docket No. 20220.

Coleman v. United States

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1966-11-09

2 counsel of record

Relies on Wynn v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1966-11-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently March 2007 · most notably Gass v. United States (1969), McKenna v. Weinberger (1984)

27 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

29019661970198019902000decided

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 →

¶1Mr. Claire O. Ducker, Sr., Washington, D. C., was on the pleadings for appellant.

¶2Messrs. David G. Bress, U. S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker, Charles L. Owen and Robert Kenly Webster, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the pleadings for appellee.

¶3Before Bazelon, Chief Judge and MCGOWAN and Leventhal, Circuit Judges, in Chambers.

¶4ORDER

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6This court having ordered appellee to show cause why the conviction should not be reversed on the ground that the record shows that a substantial issue of admissibility seriously pressed by appellant was not, for what appears to have been improper, erroneous, or irrelevant considerations, resolved by the trial judge; and appellee having submitted its response to said order, and the court having considered appellee’s response and the record on appeal; and the court being of the view that the trial judge’s reasons for refusing to resolve the admissibility issue were highly unjudicial; and since the trial was by the court sitting without a jury, a remand for hearing on the issue of admissibility alone is inappropriate, it is

¶7Ordered by the court that the judgment of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, appealed from herein, is reversed and this case is remanded with instructions to grant appellant a new trial.

¶8Circuit Judge LEVENTHAL did not participate in the foregoing order.

/397/f2d/621 · .json · Public domain