Legal Opinion

United States v. Mann

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided February 11, 1954No. Cr. No. 1692-53PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAWS, Chief Judge.

Defendants, having been convicted of robbery, have moved for a new trial or judgment of acquittal, alleging fatal variance between the indictment, which charged the property taken was that of the complaining witness, and the proof, which by the prosecution’s evidence was that the property was jointly owned with her husband, and by the testimony of the husband offered by the defense belonged to him'. '

By robbery as defined by the statute, D.C.Code, § 22-2901, which is silent as to the ownership of the property taken, is meant robbery in the usual common-law term as expanded…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Neufield v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  2. State v. . SawyerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  3. Ruben v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  4. The People v. LeachIllinois Supreme Court · 1947
  5. State v. FitzsimmonsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1936

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. WakefordMichigan Supreme Court · 1983
  2. People v. BorghesiSupreme Court of Colorado · 2003
  3. United States v. Walter B. SpearsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
  4. Riggens v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1968
  5. People of Guam v. Dennis Castro Aldan, aka Dennis Gatus Castro, aka Danny Christopher CastroSupreme Court of Guam · 2022

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API