Delegal v. United States
| Decision Date | 05 May 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 20750.,20750. |
| Citation | 329 F.2d 494 |
| Parties | Joe DELEGAL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Julian Hartridge, Jr., Julian Hartridge, Sr., Savannah, Ga., for appellant.
Donald H. Fraser, U. S. Atty., Richard C. Chadwick, Asst. U. S. Atty., Savannah, Ga., for appellee.
Before MAGRUDER,* JONES and GEWIN, Circuit Judges.
The appellant, convicted after a trial without a jury, on three counts of an indictment charging possession, in Chatham County, Southern District of Georgia, of non-tax-paid whiskey, seeks reversal of three consecutive one-year sentences. The appellant took the stand, denied receiving the liquor and denied knowing the person who testified as to the deliveries. The defense of entrapment was urged by the appellant at the trial but has been abandoned here.
Although not specifically raised at the trial, the appellant here urges that there is no proof which identified him as the Joe Delegal to whom liquor was delivered. While it would have been better if the witness who testified as to the delivery of the whiskey had pointed out the appellant as the person to whom it was delivered, the evidence was sufficient to permit the inference that the defendant on trial was the person who received the liquor.
It is asserted that venue was not proved. A witness testified that on November 15, 1961, he delivered fifty gallons of non-tax-paid whiskey to the home of Joe Delegal "here in Savannah, Georgia." He also testified that on November 17 and November 21, 1961, he made other deliveries to the home of Joe Delegal, all of which were accepted by Delegal. It could be inferred that all deliveries were made to the same place in Savannah. No proof was required that "here in Savannah" was in Chatham County, Southern District of Georgia.
* Senior Circuit Judge of the First Circuit, sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Cadena
...did not constitute prejudicial error. Identity, like fingerprints or blood samples, may be established by testimony. Delegal v. United States, 5 Cir. 1964, 329 F.2d 494, Cert. denied, 1964, 379 U.S. 821, 85 S.Ct. 44, 13 L.Ed.2d 32. The identity of each defendant was properly proved. Had the......
-
U.S. v. Seals
...it suffices to establish identity by "inference and circumstantial evidence." U.S. v. Royals, 777 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir.1985); Delegal v. U.S., 329 F.2d 494 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 821, 85 S.Ct. 44, 13 L.Ed.2d 32 No one argues that Seals was not the perpetrator of the offenses. His ......
-
U.S. v. Fern
...is sufficient to permit the inference that the defendant on trial is the person who made the statements in question. Delegal v. United States, 329 F.2d 494 (5 Cir.), cert. denied 379 U.S. 821, 85 S.Ct. 44, 13 L.Ed.2d 32 (1964). The inference here was overwhelming. Agent Mastin identified Fe......
-
Brooks v. US
...Cir.1991); United States v. Green, 757 F.2d 116, 119 (7th Cir.1985); United States v. Weed, supra, 689 F.2d at 754-755; Delegal v. United States, 329 F.2d 494 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 821, 85 S.Ct. 44, 13 L.Ed.2d 32 (1964); Becker v. State, 298 Ark. 438, 440-442, 768 S.W.2d 527, 5......