Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

415 F.2d 771

Docket No. 26082

Good v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Aug. 28, 1969.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1969-08-28

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 1974

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Leary v. United States · United States v. Covington · United States v. Lugo-Baez

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1969-08-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.

¶2*772Clyde W. Woody, Marian S. Rosen, Woody & Rosen, Houston, Tex., for appellant Howard C. Good.

¶3Morton L. Susman, U. S. Atty., James R. Gough, Homero M. Lopez, Carl Walker, Jr., Asst. U. S. Attys., Houston, Tex., for appellee.

¶4Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and THORNBERRY and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

¶5ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

¶6PER CURIAM:

¶7Appellant having been convicted of violation of 21 U.S.C. § 174 and 26 U.S.C. § 4704, involving heroin, contends in his petition for rehearing that his conviction should be reversed because of Leary v. United States, May 19, 1969, 395 U.S. 6, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 23 L.Ed.2d 57, and United States v. Covington, May 19, 1969, 395 U.S. 57, 89 S.Ct. 1559, 23 L.Ed.2d 94. Appellant’s contention is without merit. Leary v. United States, 89 S.Ct. 1532, 1553 n. 92; United States v. Walker, 5th Cir. 1969, 414 F.2d 876; United States v. Lugo-Baez, 8th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 435; United States v. Perea, 10th Cir. 1969, 413 F.2d 65.

¶8Therefore, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing in the above entitled and numbered cause be, and the same is hereby, denied.

/415/f2d/771 · .json · Public domain