Williamson v. United States
| Decision Date | 22 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 21671.,21671. |
| Citation | 340 F.2d 612 |
| Parties | Jack Marrin WILLIAMSON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
James P. Coleman, Ackerman, Miss., for appellant.
H. M. Ray, U. S. Atty., Oxford, Miss., for appellee.
Before BROWN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, District Judge.
On the retrial of this case, as our mandate plainly called for, the deposition of Moye was not offered by either party for any purpose. Consequently, conditions (1) and (2) prescribed by our former opinion, Williamson v. United States, 5 Cir., 1962, 311 F.2d 441, were not pertinent, and the Government was not required to meet them. Entrapment as such on this record was not therefore raised. Nor was there any evidence which the Trial Judge knew either judicially, actually, or factually which indicated that the initiation or prosecution of this case was the fruit of any illegal contingent agreement with Moye. On the intrinsic merits, the evidence amply sustained the finding of guilty.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Rey
...subsequently joined a per curiam opinion affirming Williamson's conviction after retrial on remand. Williamson v. United States, (Williamson II), 340 F.2d 612 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 381 U.S. 950, 85 S.Ct. 1803, 14 L.Ed.2d 724 In rare cases, use of a contingently motivated informer might,......
-
State v. Mullen
...United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 38, 331 F.2d 784 (1964); Williamson v. United States, 311 F.2d 441 (5 Cir. 1962), aff'd per curiam, 340 F.2d 612 (5 Cir.), cert. denied, 381 U.S. 950, 85 S.Ct. 1803, 14 L.Ed.2d 724 (1965); see United States v. Morrison, 348 F.2d 1003 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 3......
-
Luna v. Beto
...of Gober and delivery of narcotics to the officers. 4 Williamson v. United States, 5 Cir., 1962, 311 F.2d 441, affirmed after retrial, 340 F.2d 612; Bullock v. United States, 5 Cir., 1967, 383 F.2d 545; Hill v. United States, 5 Cir., 1964, 328 F.2d 5 United States v. Cox, 5 Cir., 1965, 342 ......
-
Harris v. United States
...in view of my recent recantation in Moore v. United States, 5 Cir. 1968, 394 F.2d 818, of my acquiescence in Williamson v. United States (Williamson II), 5 Cir. 1965, 340 F.2d 612, I renew and republicize my Williamson I, 5 Cir. 1962, 311 F.2d 441, 445, opposition to these contingent fee 1 ......