Danilo Konvalinka v. United States, 287 F.2d 346 (D.C. Cir. 1961). · Go Syfert
Search
Danilo Konvalinka v. United States, 287 F.2d 346 (D.C. Cir. 1961). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Boyd v. United States (dc, 1984-02-15)
Treatment trajectory · 1963 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1963 1994 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Boyd v. United States (2×)
D.C. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See Konvalinka v. United States, 162 A.2d 778, 782 (D.C.Mun.App.1960), aff’d, 109 U.S.App.D.C. 307, 308 , 287 F.2d 346, 347 (1961); Johnson v. United States, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 174, 177 , 426 F.2d 651, 654 (1970), cert. dismissed as improvidently granted, 401 U.S. 846 , 91 S.Ct. 1258 , 28 L.Ed.2d 523 (1971); see also United States v. Green, 139 U.S.App.D.C. 75 , 79 n. 12, 429 F.2d 754 , 758 n. 12 (1970).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Goodsaid v. District of Columbia (2×)
D.C. · 1963 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, Konvalinka v. United States, 109 U.S.App.D.C. 307 , 287 F.2d 346 , affirming Konvalinka v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 162 A.2d 778 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Danilo KONVALINKA, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
15908_1.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Jan 26, 1961.
287 F.2d 346
1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5475
• Mr. William J. Garber, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. John R. Schmertz, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty. and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for ap-pellee. Mr. Frank Q. Nebeker, Asst. U. S. Atty., also entered an appearance for appellee.
Fahy, Washington, Dan-Aher.
Cited by 13 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of assault after trial in the Municipal Court. D.C. Code § 22-504 (1951). The Municipal Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Konvalinka v. United States, 1960, 162 A.2d 778. We granted leave to appeal. The contentions here urged are of the same nature as those presented to the Municipal Court of Appeals. After careful consideration, we have concluded that the testimony of the complaining witness was sufficiently corroborated, not only by his spontaneous declaration to a police of-[*347] fleer immediately after the alleged assault — constituting a measure of corroboration of his own testimony concerning the corpus delicti — but also by the testimony of others tending to confirm his story in respect of such matters as the telephone call and cutting tool, as described in the opinion of the Municipal Court of Appeals. We find no error affecting substantial rights

Affirmed.