421 F.2d 1394 - United States v. Sutton — 421 F.2d 1394

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 2001

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

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.

¶1Summary Calendar.

¶2 *1395Howard R. Pigford, Meridian, Miss. (Court-appointed) for defendant-appellant.

¶3Robert E. Hauberg, U. S. Atty., E. Donald Strange, Asst. U. S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., for plaintiff-appellee.

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

¶5PER CURIAM:

¶6Ironically, with the ink scarcely dry on our opinion affirming co-defendants’ convictions for the underlying moonshine offenses, United States v. Campbell, 5 Cir., 1969, 419 F.2d 1144 [Dec. 2, 1969], this appeal on judicial screening1 falls by random assignment to almost the same panel challenging the revocation of probation based upon the illegal Sunday sale of liquor in Alabama just 15 days after the 2-month jail sentence expired.

¶7 After an evidential hearing the Court found that the occurrence took place and that it did not constitute entrapment. A revocation proceeding is not the trial of a criminal case, Manning v. United States, 5 Cir., 1947, 161 F.2d 827, cert. denied, 332 U.S. 792, 68 S.Ct. 102, 92 L.Ed. 374; Broadus v. United States, 5 Cir., 1963, 317 F.2d 212, cert. denied, 375 U.S. 829, 84 S.Ct. 74, 11 L.Ed.2d 61. The fact findings are fully supportable. That is the end of it.

¶8Affirmed.