Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
United States v. Wayland White, Jr.
United States v. Wayland White, Jr., 304 F.2d 158 (4th Cir. 1962)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1962-06-08
- Topic
- general
PER CURIAM. This is a companion case to United States v. Copeland, 4 Cir., 295 F.2d 635. Wayland White, Jr., the defendant here, was jointly indicted with Copeland and others for an alleged conspiracy to violate Internal Revenue Laws relating to whisky. White could not be present when his codefendants were tried and convicted.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Wayland White, Jr.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 2 opinions
UNITED STATES v. WHITE,304 F.2d 158(4th Cir. 1962)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Wayland WHITE, Jr., Appellant.
No. 8488.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued June 6, 1962.
Decided June 8, 1962.
R. Roy Mitchell, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty. (William H. Murdock, U.S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.
Before HAYNSWORTH and J. SPENCER BELL, Circuit Judges, and CRAVEN, District Judge.
Wayland White, Jr., the defendant here, was jointly indicted with Copeland and others for an alleged conspiracy to violate Internal Revenue Laws relating to whisky.
White could not be present when his codefendants were tried and convicted. Later, he was tried separately. Testimony was then introduced, which is summarized in our opinion in Copeland. The principal witness for the prosecution testified that he purchased whisky from White, that White was present during another transaction alleged to have been in furtherance of the conspiracy, that White, himself, negotiated with the witness for the sale and delivery of whisky and the procurement of jars and sugar. This witness also testified that White told him some of the details of the conspiracy.
White now seeks a reversal of his conviction upon the ground that the court erroneously received in evidence statements of certain of the alleged co-conspirators,Page 159showing the conspiracy and White's participation. He particularly objects to some of the statements received in evidence before direct evidence of White's participation in the conspiracy had been received.
These are identically the same contentions raised by White's co-conspirator, Copeland, and which we have fully considered on Copeland's appeal from his conviction.
For the reasons stated in United States v. Copeland, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Affirmed.Page 280