Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    United States of America Ex Rel. David Coleman v. Wilfred L. Denno and Edward S. Silver, 330 F.2d 441, 2d Cir. (1964)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from David Coleman. The appeals court found that the New York courts properly determined that the prosecutor's comments during summation, when viewed in light of the defense arguments and jury instructions, were not so prejudicial as to require a new trial on Coleman's murder conviction. The appeals court was convinced by the reasons given by the district court judge in his published opinion that Coleman was not deprived of any constitutional rights.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States of America Ex Rel. David Coleman v. Wilfred L. Denno and Edward S. Silver, 330 F.2d 441, 2d Cir. (1964)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    19 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from David Coleman. The appeals court found that the New York courts properly determined that the prosecutor's comments during summation, when viewed in light of the defense arguments and jury instructions, were not so prejudicial as to require a new trial on Coleman's murder conviction. The appeals court was convinced by the reasons given by the district court judge in his published opinion that Coleman was not deprived of any constitutional rights.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1964-06-22 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 330 F.2d 441 Docket: 28643

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from David Coleman. The appeals court found that the New York courts properly determined that the prosecutor's comments during summation, when viewed in light of the defense arguments and jury instructions, were not so prejudicial as to require a new trial on Coleman's murder conviction. The appeals court was convinced by the reasons given by the district court judge in his published opinion that Coleman was not deprived of any constitutional rights.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    19 views2 pages

    United States of America Ex Rel. David Coleman v. Wilfred L. Denno and Edward S. Silver, 330 F.2d 441, 2d Cir. (1964)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from David Coleman. The appeals court found that the New York courts properly determined that the prosecutor's comments during summation, when viewed in light of the defense arguments and jury instructions, were not so prejudicial as to require a new trial on Coleman's murder conviction. The appeals court was convinced by the reasons given by the district court judge in his published opinion that Coleman was not deprived of any constitutional rights.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    330 F.

    2d 441

    UNITED STATES of America ex rel. David COLEMAN,


    Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Wilfred L. DENNO and Edward S. Silver, RespondentsAppellees.
    No. 350, Docket 28643.

    United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.


    Argued March 12, 1964.
    Decided April 6, 1964, Certiorari Denied June 22, 1964, See
    84 S.Ct. 1938.

    Jack L. Kroner, New York City (Stanley J. Levy, Frederick C. Stern and
    Martin Garbus, New York City, on the brief), for petitioner-appellant.
    William I. Siegel, Asst. Dist. Atty., Kings County, Brooklyn, N.Y.
    (Edward S. Silver, Dist. Atty., Kings County, and Mortimer Sattler, New
    York City, on the brief), for respondents-appellees.
    Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, SMITH, Circuit Judge, and LEVET, 1
    District Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    It was well within the province of the New York Courts to determine whether
    the prosecutor's comments in summation, taken in the light of defense counsel's
    argument and the careful and categorical instructions of the trial judge, were so
    prejudicial to the defendant as to require a new trial of the charges which
    resulted in his conviction for murder in Kings County in 1960. For the reasons
    given by Judge Bryan in his detailed and exhaustive opinion reported at 223
    F.Supp. 938, S.D.N.Y. (1963) we are convinced that the defendant was not
    deprived of any Constitutional rights. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's
    denial of petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

    The mandate shall issue in five days.

    Sitting by designation

    You might also like