Kathleen Marra Mole v. United States, 330 F.2d 1022 (5th Cir. 1964). · Go Syfert
Search
Kathleen Marra Mole v. United States, 330 F.2d 1022 (5th Cir. 1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Chicarelli (ca3, 1971-07-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Chicarelli
3rd Cir. · 1971 · confidence medium
See United States v. Manos, 340 F.2d 534, 540 (3d Cir. 1965) ; Maddox v. United States, 330 F.2d 1022, 1023 (5th Cir. 1964) ; Carroll v. United States, 326 F.2d 72, 84 (9th Cir. 1964) ; Wegman v. United States, supra; Daniel v. United States, 268 F.2d 849, 853 (5th Cir. 1959). .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Chicarelli
3rd Cir. · 1971 · confidence medium
See United States v. Manos, 340 F.2d 534, 540 (3d Cir. 1965); Maddox v. United States, 330 F.2d 1022, 1023 (5th Cir. 1964); Carroll v. United States, 326 F.2d 72, 84 (9th Cir. 1964); Wegman v. United States, supra; Daniel v. United States, 268 F.2d 849, 853 (5th Cir. 1959) 6 It is noted that an appellate court's view that 'it would be better to (discuss matters) outside the hearing of the jury' does not mean that discussion of such matters in their presence is reversible error.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kathleen Marra MOLE, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
21009_1.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Apr 20, 1964.
330 F.2d 1022
O. L. Crumbley, Macon, Ga., for appellant., Sampson M. Culpepper, Asst. U. S. Atty., Floyd M. Buford, U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for appellee.
Maris, Gewin, Bell.
Published
PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict of guilty under an indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 703. On a previous appearance we reversed the conviction of appellant on the same charge because of the improper admission of evidence and remanded for a new trial. Mole v. United States, 5 Cir., 1963, 315 F.2d 156.

The evidence discloses, as it did on the prior appeal, that a jury question was presented as to guilt or innocence. A careful consideration of the errors assigned in the light of the record and the applicable law convinces us that all are without merit, and that the judgment should be, and it is affirmed.