TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Sam McKnight

United States v. McKnight, 927 F.2d 606 (6th Cir. 1991)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
February 25, 1991
Docket
No. 90-3495
Citations
927 F.2d 6061991 WL 235111991 U.S. App. LEXIS 7488
Status
Unpublished

Opinion

927 F.2d 606

Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sam McKNIGHT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-3495.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 25, 1991.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, 89-00314, Batcholder, J.

N.D.Ohio

AFFIRMED.

Before KENNEDY and ALAN E. NORRIS, Circuit Judges; MILES, Senior District Judge. *

PER CURIAM.

1

Defendant, Sam McKnight, appeals the order of the district court denying his motion for acquittal, and appeals his conviction.

2

Having carefully considered the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties, we are unable to say that the district court erred in denying defendant's motion or in declining to instruct the jury as requested by defense counsel. Furthermore, there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

3

We agree with the district judge that there was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant's chief contention is that there was a paucity of identification evidence, but two agents identified defendant as the person indicted, there was evidence that the seller of the cocaine was driving an automobile belonging to defendant's wife, and upon his apprehension, defendant made a comment indicating he was aware of the street name of the agent to whom a sale was made.

4

The district judge also followed existing law when she declined the request of defense counsel that she instruct the jury that, if its verdict was guilty, the court would be required to impose a minimum mandatory sentence. United States v. Davidson, 367 F.2d 60, 63-64 (6th Cir.1966). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

* The Honorable Wendell A. Miles, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Michigan, sitting by designation

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. James Paul Davidson, United States of Am. v. Evelyn Vaughn Davidson, 367 F.2d 60 (6th Cir. 1966) 32

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