Fielding v. United States, 10490.

Decision Date12 December 1947
Docket NumberNo. 10490.,10490.
Citation164 F.2d 1022
PartiesFIELDING v. UNITED STATES.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

Fred P. Geib and Clem H. Block, both of Grand Rapids, Mich., for appellant.

Joseph F. Deeb, of Grand Rapids, Mich., for appellee.

Before MARTIN, McALLISTER, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

MILLER, Circuit Judge.

This appeal having been considered by the Court on the record, oral arguments and briefs of respective counsel; and it appearing that it was not error for the Government to prove its case without using all the witnesses available to it, Morton v. United States, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 147 F.2d 28, 31, certiorari denied 324 U.S. 875, 65 S.Ct. 1015, 89 L.Ed. 1428; that no objection was made by counsel for appellant to the introduction in evidence of the exhibits carrying the notations now complained of, as provided by Rule 51, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. following section 687, and counsel's request that the Court call as its own witnesses the available witnesses not used by the Government in order that he might cross examine them was general and did not indicate that such cross-examination was desired for the purpose of explaining the notations on the exhibits referred to, or would be restricted to that field; that the calling of a witness by the Court as the Court's witness is a matter within the discretion of the trial court, Hirschfeld v. United States, 7 Cir., 54 F.2d 62; United States v. Pape, 2 Cir., 144 F.2d 778, 782; that such discretion was not abused by the trial court in the trial of this case; that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict; and no reversible error being shown by the record; it is accordingly ordered that the judgment of the District Court be, and is now, affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • People v. Swilley
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • July 17, 2019
    ...States v. Adedoyin , 369 F.3d 337, 342 (C.A. 3, 2004) ; McMillan v. Castro , 405 F.3d 405, 409 (C.A. 6, 2005) ; Fielding v. United States , 164 F.2d 1022, 1023 (C.A. 6, 1947).11 People v. Babcock , 469 Mich. 247, 269, 666 N.W.2d 231 (2003).12 Id.13 Another example of this unwarranted interv......
  • Kowalchuk v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • September 16, 1949
    ...the issue involved. It was not necessary for the Government to also offer evidence of a secondary and cumulative nature. Fielding v. United States, 6 Cir., 164 F.2d 1022; Morton v. United States, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 147 F.2d 28, certiorari denied 324 U. S. 875, 65 S.Ct. 1015, 89 L.Ed. 1428......
  • Dipson Theatres v. Buffalo Theatres
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • September 27, 1949
    ...the principles of Interstate Circuit v. United States, 306 U.S. 208, 225, 227, 59 S.Ct. 467, 83 L.Ed. 610 * * *, rule the case at bar." 164 F.2d 1022. In 306 U.S. at page 227, 59 S.Ct. at page 474, the court said: "It is elementary that an unlawful conspiracy may be and often is formed with......
  • Estrella-Ortega v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • February 26, 1970
    ...v. United States (5th Cir. 1947) 162 F.2d 120, cert. denied (1947) 332 U.S. 808, 68 S.Ct. 108, 92 L.Ed. 386; Fielding v. United States (6th Cir. 1947) 164 F.2d 1022.) The district court correctly submitted the entrapment issue to the jury because the issue turned on the resolution of confli......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT