TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Charles Thomas Czaplicki, United States of America v. Thomas Randolph Wallis

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Thomas CZAPLICKI, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas Randolph WALLIS, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Charles Thomas Czaplicki, United States of Am. v. Thomas Randolph Wallis, 446 F.2d 640 (9th Cir. 1971)
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
July 22, 1971
Docket
No. 71-1337_1
Judges
Koelsch, Browning, Duniway
Citations
446 F.2d 6401971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8791

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Charles Thomas Czaplicki and Thomas Randolph Wallis were jointly tried and each was found guilty, by a jury, of various violations of 26 U.S.C. § 176a. Their appeals from the judgments, rendered on the respective verdicts, were consolidated. We conclude that both judgments should be affirmed.

Since no motion for acquittal was made in the trial court, neither appellant is now entitled to urge that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict against him [Grant v. United States, 291 F.2d 746 (9th Cir. 1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 999 , 82 S.Ct. 627 , 7 L.Ed.2d 537 ]; however, we have nevertheless reviewed the record and find in it ample proof tending to establish that the defendants were individually guilty of the respective crimes of which they were convicted.

Although the prosecution should not have sought to use as exemplars two illegally seized credit card invoices signed by Wallis, the error was harmless: not only did the court, on objection made, order the writings suppressed and admonish the jury to disregard all reference to them, but Wallis himself thereafter testified on direct examination that he had in fact signed the instrument in question.

Judgments affirmed,

How later courts describe this case

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

1976: 11988: 11989: 11993: 119762026peak 1976 · 1

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
Grant v. United States, 291 F.2d 746 (9th Cir. 1961) 34

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