Sam G. Myers, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 356 F.2d 469 (5th Cir. 1966)

Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (March 15, 1966)

Docket number: 21783

Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/sam-myers-united-states-america-appellee-36715645
Id. vLex: VLEX-36715645

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Request manual translation

Search in this document

Document options

Sponsored Ads:

Citations:

Loading article preview... cerrar

cerrar

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Joe R. Steele, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 222 F.2d 628 (5th Cir. 1955)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - I. C. Turner and E. v. Turner, Appellants, v. United States of America, Appellee., 222 F.2d 926 (4th Cir. 1955)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - E. C. Lloyd, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 226 F.2d 9 (5th Cir. 1955)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - James L. Flemister, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 260 F.2d 513 (5th Cir. 1958)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Ray C. Ballantyne, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 293 F.2d 112 (5th Cir. 1961)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. City of Springfield, Defendant, Appellee. City of Springfield, Defendant, Appellant, v. United States of America, Plaintiff, Appellee., 294 F.2d 958 (1st Cir. 1961)

See other documents that cite the same legislation

RSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raleigh H. Lawhon, Defendant-Appellant., 499 F.2d 352 (5th Cir. 1974)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William O. Radseck, Defendant-Appellant., 718 F.2d 233 (7th Cir. 1983)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - USA vs. Hart (5th Cir. 2002)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard E. Schuster, M.D., Defendant-Appellant., 777 F.2d 264 (5th Cir. 1985)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Bobsee Corporation Et Al., Appellants, v. United States of America, Appellee., 411 F.2d 231 (5th Cir. 1969)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Cir. - 48 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 574, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 915 United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry Francis, Jacqueline Dennis, Defendants-Appellants., 131 F.3d 1452 (11th Cir. 1997)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Robert Gordon Hayes, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 407 F.2d 189 (5th Cir. 1969)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin R. Jennings, Defendant-Appellant., 724 F.2d 436 (5th Cir. 1984)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joe Raymond Diez and Peter A. Palori, Defendants-Appellants., 515 F.2d 892 (5th Cir. 1975)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Cir. - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Norton, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Paul Fosco, James Pinckard, Paul A. Di Franco, James Norton, Defendants- Appellants., 867 F.2d 1354 (11th Cir. 1989)

See all citations to this document

Text:

Newton B. Schwartz, Schwartz & Lapin, Houston, Tex., for appellant.

Morton L. Susman, Asst. U.S. Atty., Woodrow Seals, U.S. Atty., Jerald D. Mize, James R. Gough, Asst. U.S. Attys., Houston, Tex., for appellee.

Before JONES and BROWN, Circuit Judges, and DYER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Of the many procedural errors Appellant asserts to have occurred in his trial for tax evasion, only one has any semblance of merit or requires discussion: permitting the jury to use a summary of the evidence prepared by a Government agent who testified. Though the submission to the jury in tax evasion cases, where the facts are often voluminous and complicated, of summaries of the evidence (in either narrative or tabular form) has often been approved, Ballantyne v. United States, 5 Cir., 1961, 293 F.2d 112, 116, rehearing denied, 294 F.2d 958, cert. denied, 1962, 369 U.S. 802, 82 S.Ct. 641, 7 L.Ed.2d 549; Conford v. United States, 10 Cir., 1964, 336 F.2d 285; Swallow v. United States, 10 Cir., 1962, 307 F.2d 81; Turner v. United States, 4 Cir., 1955, 222 F.2d 926, cert. denied, 350 U.S. 831, 76 S.Ct. 65, 100 L.Ed. 742; United States v. Kelley, 2 Cir., 1939, 105 F.2d 912; see 10 Mertens, Federal Income Taxation 55A.22, at 142 (rev. ed. 1964), their preparation and use must be carefully handled by the trial Judge. Having carefully examined the compained of summary, the evidence it purports to cover, and the Court's instructions accompanying its submission to the jury, we find no impropriety in either the preparation or use here.

Although the summary does not include all the evidence, or Appellant's theories of the evidence, it does not purport to. See Flemister v. United States, 5 Cir., 1958, 260 F.2d 513. It does not contain anything not in the record, United States v. Ward, 3 Cir., 1948, 169 F.2d 460, and identifies in detail the evidence summarized, Lloyd v. United States, 5 Cir., 1955, 226 F.2d 9. Finally, in view of its contents and the Judge's instructions regarding its use, this summary did not usurp the province of the jury. Steele v. United States, 5 Cir., 1955, 222 F.2d 628.

All other contentions are devoid of merit.

Affirmed.

Sponsored Ads:

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

Constitutions
Forms and Contracts
Legal Books and Journals
Case Law
News and Business
Regulations
U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access

Home / United States /

Case Law

vlex /