United States v. Roy Cecil Bolton, 438 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Roy Cecil Bolton, 438 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Statutes interpreted (leading-cases list)
#8 18 U.S.C. § 2812 cited 1× in this case · 10 total citations of statute
How cited ↗
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Roy Cecil BOLTON, Defendant-Appellant
30680.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Mar 2, 1971.
Published opinion
438 F.2d 1219
1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11589
George D. McMillan, Jr., Birmingham, Ala., (Court-appointed) for defendant-appellant., Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S. Atty., L. Scott Atkins, Asst. U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.
Thornberry, Morgan, Clark.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

The sole issue in this appeal by Roy Cecil Bolton, who was convicted September 28, 1970 of transporting a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2812, is whether the trial court erred in refusing appellant’s request for a continuance because of the absence of a defense witness. The granting of a continuance until an absent witness can be procured is, of course, within the sound discretion of the district court, and it is not error to deny a requested continuance in the absence of a showing of an abuse of that discretion. United States v. Pierce, 5th Cir. 1969, 411 F.2d 678; Barnes v. United States, 5th Cir. 1967, 374 F.2d 126; Samples v. United States, 5th Cir. 1941, 121 F.2d 263. We have carefully read the record and have not found an indication of that abuse of discretion that would require reversal. Accordingly, we affirm.

Affirmed.