Davis v. United States
Decision Date | 12 November 1955 |
Docket Number | No. 5166.,5166. |
Citation | 227 F.2d 568 |
Parties | Robert Edward DAVIS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Sam W. Moore and David Tant, Oklahoma City, Okl., on the brief, for appellant.
H. Dale Cook, Asst. U. S. Atty., Oklahoma City, Okl. (Paul W. Cress, U. S. Atty., Oklahoma City, Okl., was with him on the brief), for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, HUXMAN, Circuit Judge, and SAVAGE, District Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. The appellant was found guilty by a jury of the illegal transfer of bulk marihuana and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of five years.
The only assigned error urged by the appellant is that the court made unreasonable comments on the evidence in his charge to the jury. The charge, in pertinent part, follows:
It is well recognized that a trial judge in an United States District Court may comment on the evidence and express an opinion thereon in his charge to the jury. Indeed, in many cases, it is his clear duty to do so. Minner v. United States, 10 Cir., 57 F.2d 506. However, it was made quite clear in the Minner case that, in analyzing and commenting on the evidence, the judge exercises discretion subject to limitations inherent in the very nature of the judicial office. It was there said, at page 513:
But it can hardly be said that the trial court commented on the evidence in the case at bar. There was obviously no attempt made to summarize it. Rather the court was content to make a statement laying emphasis upon the heinousness of the offense charged and to express an opinion that the evidence convinced him of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.
The circumstances under which a judge may, with propriety, inform the jury that he is of the opinion that a defendant on trial is guilty are stated by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Murdock, 290 U.S. 389, 394, 54...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. Chanthadara
...has applied these principles to conclude that a trial judge's statements deprived the defendant of a fair trial. In Davis v. United States, 227 F.2d 568 (10th Cir. 1955), the judge gave the jury the following I feel also it is my duty to state to you that a lot of people don't realize what ......
-
Commonwealth v. Archambault
... ... judge cannot indirectly effect a directed verdict of guilty ... As the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ... recently noted: ... 'In a criminal case a court ... F.2d 75 (10th Cir. 1963); United States v. Woods, 252 F.2d ... 334 (2d Cir. 1958); Davis v. United States, 227 F.2d 568 ... (10th Cir. 1955); United States v. Link, 202 F.2d 592 (3d ... ...
-
United States v. Brandom
...McBride v. United States, 314 F.2d 75 (10th Cir. 1963); Bennett v. United States, 252 F.2d 97, 99 (10th Cir. 1958); Davis v. United States, 227 F.2d 568 (10th Cir. 1955). Cf., United States v. Ornstein, 355 F.2d 222, 224 (6th Cir. In McBride v. United States, supra, the defendant was also c......
-
Braley v. Gladden
...all facts necessary to conviction are undisputed. McBride v. United States, 314 F.2d 75 (10th Cir. 1963). See also Davis v. United States, 227 F.2d 568 (10th Cir. 1955); Sadler v. United States, 303 F.2d 664 (10th Cir. 1962). The Supreme Court made it clear that Murdock did not represent su......