United States v. Joseph Romeo Duck
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Per curiam
With commendable candor, defendant concedes that the sole issue presented for review is whether the testimony of a handwriting expert, standing alone, was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction for forging an endorsement upon a United States Treasurer’s check. Our own examination of the record corroborates defendant’s characterization. Defendant does not dispute, as urged by the government in a motion for summary affirmance, that the point was decided adversely to defendant in United States v. Acosta, 369 F.2d 41 (4 Cir. 1966), cert. den. 386 U.S. 921, 87 S.Ct. 886, 17 L.Ed.2d 792…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. Orlando Gutierrez AcostaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
3Cited by5 opinions
- Calvin Chatman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
- United States v. EhrenbergDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
- State v. FarmerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
- State v. PagottoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
- State v. PagottoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2000