TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Marion Lee Walker

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Marion Lee WALKER, Appellant

United States v. Walker, 415 F.2d 530 (9th Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
August 14, 1969
Docket
No. 23870
Judges
Barnes, Hamley, Kilkenny, Per Curiam
Citations
415 F.2d 530

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Marion Lee Walker (Lee) was charged, under 18 U.S.C. § 3 , with being an accessory after the fact to a bank robbery allegedly committed by his brother, Junior Harold Walker (Junior). Lee was convicted following a jury trial and takes this appeal.

At the time Lee was tried, Junior had not been convicted of the bank robbery. Because of this circumstance, Lee argues that the trial court, upon its own motion, should have entered a judgment of acquittal. However, conviction of the principal is not a necessary condition precedent to the conviction of an accessory after the fact. Hiram v. United States, 9 Cir., 354 F.2d 4, 6, note 2 (9th Cir. 1965).

Lee also argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of guilty. Considering the evidence which was entirely circumstantial, in the light most favorable to the Government, we think that the jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Junior robbed the bank, that Lee had actual knowledge that Junior robbed the bank, and that, with such knowledge, Lee gave assistance and comfort to Junior with the intent of preventing Junior’s apprehension and trial for the robbery.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2004: 12021: 120042026peak 2004 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Campbell481 P.3d 118 (Idaho 2021)
  2. United States v. Cruz-Santiago330 F. Supp. 2d 26 (D.P.R. 2004)

Most recent

  1. State v. Campbell481 P.3d 118 (Idaho 2021)
  2. United States v. Cruz-Santiago330 F. Supp. 2d 26 (D.P.R. 2004)

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.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Hiram v. United States, 354 F.2d 4 (9th Cir. 1965) 28

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list