Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13 views

    United States v. Colon Norris, 325 F.2d 209, 4th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after one of the prosecution's questions to a defense witness implied that the defendant had a criminal history. The appellate court found that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the mistrial. The court noted that motions for mistrial are generally within the trial judge's sound discretion. It also determined that the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming and the brief improper question did not substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the conviction.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Colon Norris, 325 F.2d 209, 4th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    13 views2 pages
    The defendant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after one of the prosecution's questions to a defense witness implied that the defendant had a criminal history. The appellate court found that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the mistrial. The court noted that motions for mistrial are generally within the trial judge's sound discretion. It also determined that the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming and the brief improper question did not substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the conviction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1963-11-26 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 325 F.2d 209 Docket: 8967_1

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The defendant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after one of the prosecution's questions to a defense witness implied that the defendant had a criminal history. The appellate court found that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the mistrial. The court noted that motions for mistrial are generally within the trial judge's sound discretion. It also determined that the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming and the brief improper question did not substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the conviction.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Colon Norris, 325 F.2d 209, 4th Cir. (1963)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after one of the prosecution's questions to a defense witness implied that the defendant had a criminal history. The appellate court found that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the mistrial. The court noted that motions for mistrial are generally within the trial judge's sound discretion. It also determined that the evidence against the defendant was overwhelming and the brief improper question did not substantially affect the defendant's right to a fair trial. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the conviction.

    Copyright:

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

    325 F.

    2d 209

    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,


    v.
    Colon NORRIS, Appellant.
    No. 8967.

    United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.


    Argued November 20, 1963.
    Decided November 26, 1963.

    D. K. Stewart, Dunn, N. C., for appellant.


    Alton T. Cummings, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Robert H. Cowen, U. S. Atty., on
    brief), for appellee.
    Before BOREMAN and J. SPENCER BELL, Circuit Judges, and FIELD,
    District Judge.
    PER CURIAM.

    Defendant-appellant urges as reversible error the refusal of the trial court to


    grant a motion to withdraw a juror and declare a mistrial. One of the defendant's
    own alibi witnesses testified concerning a purchase of non-tax-paid whiskey by
    one Ralph Wilson, and denied that the purchase was made from the defendant
    as charged by the government or that the defendant was present at the time. The
    witness referred to his conversation with Ralph Wilson wherein the latter stated
    that he and the defendant "built some time" together at Greenville. There was
    no objection to this testimony.

    On cross-examination of this witness, government counsel asked: "Didn't you


    just testify that Ralph told you that he and Colon [the defendant] were building
    time together." Before the question was answered, defense counsel interposed
    an objection and the Court ruled: "The objection is sustained. Gentlemen of the
    jury, you will not consider the last question propounded to the witness * * *.
    Erase that from your minds."

    Ordinarily, the granting or refusing of a motion for mistrial is in the sound

    discretion of the trial judge1 and we find no abuse of such discretion in this
    case. The evidence of defendant's guilt was overwhelming. We do not think that
    this asserted error substantially affected the defendant's right to a fair trial or
    that it warrants a reversal of his conviction.

    Affirmed.

    Notes:
    1

    White v. United States, 279 F.2d 740, 749 (4th Cir. 1960)

    You might also like