United States of America v. Joe Chatman Munford, Appellant., 593 F.2d 512 (3rd Cir. 1979)

Federal Circuits, 3rd Cir. (March 01, 1979)

Docket number: 77-1902


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/united-america-joe-chatman-munford-36913185
Id. vLex: VLEX-36913185

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

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - United States of America Ex Rel. John Sullivan, Appellant, v. Julius T. Cuyler, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania, and the District Attorney of Philadelphia County, Appellees., 631 F.2d 14 (3rd Cir. 1980) Appellant, v. Julius T. Cuyler, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania, and the District Attorney of Philadelphia County, Appellees.

U.S. Supreme Court - Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - United States of America, v. James Parker Carter, Appellant., 619 F.2d 293 (3rd Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Donald Smith, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Charles E. Anderson, Respondent-Appellant., 689 F.2d 59 (6th Cir. 1982)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Cir. - Angel Tueros, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Greiner, Sup'T, Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent-Appellee., 343 F.3d 587 (2nd Cir. 2003)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - Sullivan, John v. Cuyler, Julius T., Superintendent, Graterford State Correctional Institution and District Attorney of Philadelphia County. Appeal of Julius T. Cuyler and the District Attorney of Philadelphia County. Sullivan, John v. Cuyler, Julius T., Superintendent, Graterford State Correctional Institution and District Attorney of Philadelphia County Appeal of John Sullivan., 723 F.2d 1077 (3rd Cir. 1984) John v. Cuyler, Julius T., Superintendent, Graterford State Correctional Institution and District Attorney of Philadelphia County. Appeal of Julius T. Cuyler and the District Attorney of Philadelphia County. Sullivan, John v. Cuyler, Julius T., Superintendent, Graterford State Correctional Institution and District Attorney of Philadelphia County Appeal of John Sullivan.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - Alexander English, Petitioner-Appellant, v. United States of America, Respondent-Appellee., 620 F.2d 150 (7th Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - United States of America, Appellee, v. Dale M. Preston, A/K/a Jami Mansour Shabazz, Appellant., 910 F.2d 81 (3rd Cir. 1990)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - United States of America v. Albert Defalco, Ronald Blackwell, Leonardo Leonard Arcieri, Ronald Chicarella, Carlos Varas, Patrice Patricio Bergoeing, Albert Defalco, Appellant, No. 78-2126. United States of America v. Albert Defalco, Ronald Blackwell, Leonard Arcieri, Ronald Chicarella, Carlos Varas, Patrice Patricio Bergoeing, Albert Defalco, Appellant, No. 78-2209., 644 F.2d 132 (3rd Cir. 1980)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - Government of the Virgin Islands v. Zepp, Jo-Ann. Appeal of Jo Ann Zepp., 748 F.2d 125 (3rd Cir. 1984)

Text:

David R. Morrison, Stassen Kostos and Mason, Philadelphia, Pa., David W. Marston, U. S. Atty., Walter S. Batty, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Chief, Appellate Section, for appellant.

David W. Marston, U. S. Atty., Walter S. Batty, Jr., Chief Appellate Section, Douglas B. Richardson, Asst. U. S. Attys., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Before ADAMS, GIBBONS and GARTH, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

GIBBONS, Circuit Judge.

Joe Chatman Munford appeals from a judgment of sentence after a jury found him guilty of violating 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The facts of the case are provided in the majority opinion for the court en banc in United States v. Belle, 3 Cir., 593 F.2d 487, No. 77-1903. There, Judge Garth sets forth the reasons why a Terry stop of Belle was proper. Those reasons apply with equivalent force to Munford. Similarly, the majority's conclusions that Belle's arrest was lawful and that the seizure of the heroin from the Lincoln Continental under Munford's control was proper govern Munford's assertion to like effect as well. Munford also contends: (1) that his post-arrest statements, made after he received Miranda warnings, should have been excluded; (2) that there was insufficient evidence to sustain a verdict against him; (3) that the district court impermissibly summarized the evidence; and (4) that the prosecutor's closing argument was improper. We reject all these contentions.

The judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

* The opinion as reproduced here reflects certain technical changes made necessary by the withdrawal of the panel opinion in a companion case, United States v. Belle, and the substitution of an en banc decision in said case. See 593 F.2d 487 (3d Cir. 1979). These changes, entered subsequent to the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in this case, United States v. Munford, have no effect on the legal substance of either opinion

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

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