Opinion · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Albert E. Blackshear v. United States

Albert E. Blackshear v. United States, 252 F.2d 853 (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1958)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1958-03-18
Topic: general

*854 PER CURIAM. Blackshear was convicted of robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. On appeal he argues that his arrest was illegal and that the decision of the Supreme Court in the Mallory case 1 precluded the admission of certain statements which he made. Since he did not raise the point below, and since the circumstances do not call for an application of Rule 52(b), 18 U.S.C.A., we do not consider the alleged error. 2 Lawson v. United States, 1957, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 332, 248 F.2d 654.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Albert E. Blackshear v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status: pending
Cited by: 10 opinions

BLACKSHEAR v. UNITED STATES,252 F.2d 853(D.C. Cir. 1958)

Albert E. BLACKSHEAR, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 14139.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued January 22, 1958.

Decided February 20, 1958.

Petition for Rehearing In Banc Denied March 18, 1958.

Mr. Dayton M. Harrington, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. James D. Graham, Jr., Washington, D.C. (both appointed by this Court) was on the brief for appellant.

Mr. Harold D. Rhynedance, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., for appellee. Mr. Oliver Gasch, U.S. Atty., and Messrs. Arthur J. McLaughlin, and Lewis Carroll, Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the brief for appellee.

Before PRETTYMAN, BAZELON and WASHINGTON, Circuit Judges.Page 854

PER CURIAM.

Blackshear was convicted of robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. On appeal he argues that his arrest was illegal and that the decision of the Supreme Court in the Mallory case¹precluded the admission of certain statements which he made.

Since he did not raise the point below, and since the circumstances do not call for an application of Rule 52(b), 18 U.S.C.A., we do not consider the alleged error.²Lawson v. United States, 1957, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 332, 248 F.2d 654. The judgment of the District Court is therefore

Affirmed.

Mallory v. United States, 1957,354 U.S. 449,77 S.Ct. 1356,1 L.Ed.2d 1479. ↩
The statements made were in the nature of an alibi. Conviction evidently rested on other evidence, chiefly that of the victim. ↩