Bynum v. United States
| Decision Date | 07 January 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 15373.,15373. |
| Citation | 107 US App. DC 109,274 F.2d 767 |
| Parties | Clayborne BYNUM, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. Henry L. Johnson, Jr., Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Nathan J. Paulson, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before FAHY, WASHINGTON and DANAHER, Circuit Judges.
Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied January 26, 1960.
In Bynum v. United States, 104 U.S. App.D.C. 368, 262 F.2d 465, we reversed the conviction of the present appellant on an indictment for the same crime of which he now stands convicted on a new indictment, resulting in the judgment on appeal. Our reversal rested upon the use by the prosecution of a fingerprint of appellant obtained as a product of his unlawful arrest. On the trial now under review the fingerprint so obtained was not used; instead, an older fingerprint in the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in no way connected with the unlawful arrest, was used for purposes of comparison. There was competent evidence from which the jury could conclude that the Government's expert obtained a fingerprint from the scene of the crime and that both it and the fingerprint from the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation were those of appellant.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ostroski
...II, does not preclude the state from acquiring, through an untainted source, a second palm print and blood sample. Bynum v. United States, 274 F.2d 767 (D.C.Cir.1960). The exclusionary rule applies to suppress evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment to the United States const......
-
Crews v. United States
...carried the burden of showing that the challenged evidence was "in no way connected with the unlawful arrest." Bynum v. United States, 107 U.S.App.D.C. 109, 274 F.2d 767 (1960). We conclude that the contested identification cannot be excepted from suppression under the Wong Sun-Silverthorne......
-
Crews v. United States
...in part upon the two Bynum v. United States decisions, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 368, 262 F.2d 465 (1958), appeal after retrial, 107 U.S.App.D.C. 109, 274 F.2d 767 (1960). In Bynum I, the court ordered the suppression of obtained following an illegal arrest. Accord, Mills v. Wainwright, 415 F.2d 787......
-
United States ex rel. Gockley v. Myers
...a conviction could be sustained, 394 U.S. at 726, n. 4, 89 S.Ct. 1394. This is what occurred in Bynum. See Bynum v. United States, 107 U.S.App.D.C. 109, 274 F.2d 767 (1960). I disagree with the majority's reading of Davis and Bynum, and do not believe there is justification for enlarging th......