TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Shelby Louis Pollack

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shelby Louis POLLACK, A/K/A Sheldon Louis Polakoff, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Pollack, 433 F.2d 967 (5th Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
October 26, 1970
Docket
No. 967
Judges
Bell, Ainsworth, Godbold
Citations
433 F.2d 9671970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6791

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Pollack was convicted on six counts of an indictment charging violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341 , which prohibits the use of the mails to execute a fraudulent scheme. We affirm the conviction.

The district court allowed the members of the jury to take notes during the trial. There is no assertion that this was error. Indeed, defense counsel agreed to this procedure. Appellant contends, firstly, that the court erred in failing to grant a mistrial after discovering that one juror had asked another during the trial about the number of witnesses who had appeared, the latter juror answering by referring to her notepad. Secondly, appellant asserts that the court erred in instructing the jury as to the use of the notes during their deliberations in that they were told that they could be used in any manner they saw fit. Both contentions are without merit.

In Harris v. United States, 9 Cir., 1958, 261 F.2d 792 , the court held that permitting the jury to take notes during trial and to use such notes during deliberations were matters within the sound discretion of the trial judge. See also Toles v. United States, 9 Cir., 1962, *968 308 F.2d 590 . Absent abuse of this discretion, the ruling of the lower court should not be disturbed. The inquiry from one juror to the other regarding the number of witnesses had nothing to do with the merits of the case. The instruction as to the use of the notes is taken out of context. The charge is perfectly clear that the verdict was to be rendered on the evidence as recollected by each juror. We find no abuse of discretion.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1970: 119702026peak 1970 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Shelby Louis Pollack433 F.2d 967 (5th Cir. 1970)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Shelby Louis Pollack433 F.2d 967 (5th Cir. 1970)

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Toles v. United States, 308 F.2d 590 (9th Cir. 1962) 40
Harris v. United States, 261 F.2d 792 (9th Cir. 1958) 17

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