United States v. James Burel Jones, 460 F.2d 325 (9th Cir. 1972). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. James Burel Jones, 460 F.2d 325 (9th Cir. 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
How cited ↗
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
James Burel JONES, Defendant-Appellant
72-1112.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
May 18, 1972.
Published opinion
460 F.2d 325
1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9481
Frank McCabe (appeared), Frank Ubhaus, Asst. Federal Public Defenders, San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appellant., James Bruen, Asst. U. S. Atty. (appeared), Robert Carey, Asst. U. S. Atty., James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Carter, Wright, Trask.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Jones appeals from his conviction for possession of stolen mail. 18 U.S.C. § 1708. We affirm.

Neither of Jones’ claims has merit. The challenged remarks of the prosecutor, taken in context, were not such as to mislead the jury. Jones’ counsel did not object to them and made no request to the trial judge for a cautionary statement, if one were in fact warranted. While we are highly skeptical that there was any error, assuming that there were, it was surely harmless. Fed. R.Crim.P. 52(a).

Jones also attacks one of the instructions to the jury. His counsel was afforded an opportunity to object to the instructions at trial and did not do so. Hence review is foreclosed. Fed.R.Crim. P. 30.

Affirmed. The mandate shall issue forthwith.