United States v. La Novara
UNITED STATES v. LA NOVARA Et Al.
Opinion
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
We see no merit whatever in any of appellants’ contentions:
(a) The evidence amply supports the verdict.
(b) Nothing in United States v. Chiarella, 2 Cir., 187 F.2d 12 , avails appellants. For all else aside, if count 2 was not a proper basis of conviction independent of count 3, nevertheless appellants were not hurt since the sentences under counts 2 and 3 are concurrent, 1
and no evidence was received under count 2 which was not admissible under count 3.
(c) Even if we assume that appellants did not waive their requests to change their pleas, after all the evidence was in, from not guilty to guilty, the refusal of those requests could work them no harm of which they may complain.
(d) The trial judge did not err in failing to charge on the subject of entrapment, since appellants did not ask for such a charge and the evidence did not justify it.
(e) We think the judge correctly charged concerning conspiracy, and that he adequately differentiated between the portions of his charge separately dealing with *261 conspiracy and aiding and abetting; moreover, appellants neither objected to these parts of the charge nor asked to have them amplified or modified.
Affirmed.
1
. Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 85 , 63 S.Ct. 1375 , 87 L.Ed. 1774 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.