Sing Wall v. United States of America, Lawrence Wall v. United States
Sing WALL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee; Lawrence WALL, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
Opinion
TUTTLE, Circuit Judge.
This opinion relates to separate appeals prosecuted by Sing Wall and Lawrence Wall, from convictions of violating 26 U.S.C.A. § 3294 (c), and sentences of one year’s imprisonment. Since the transcripts of record and the specifications of error are practically identical in the two cases, and since they were consolidated for trial in the District Court, it is appropriate to dispose of them in a single opinion.
*159 Only two points are relied upon by appellants: that § 3294(c) is unconstitutionally vague, and that the trial court should have granted their motions to tranfer their cases from the Tampa Division to the Jacksonville Division. The first of these points was decided adversely to appellants’ contention in Sulli v. United States, 5 Cir., 213 F.2d 100 , and certiorari was recently denied in that case, 348 U.S. 826 , 75 S.Ct. 43 .
As for the second point, it is precisely the same argument which was made in Ippolito v. United States, 5 Cir., 223 F.2d 154 , and Cagnina v. United States, 5 Cir., 223 F.2d 149 , and for the reasons stated in the former of these we think appellants’ contentions on this point are equally without merit.
The judgments are Affirmed.
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.