Legal Opinion

In re M. M. J.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 1975No. 8292PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant was found guilty of burglary and grand larceny.1 He appeals the judgment entered on that finding on two grounds: (1) that the trial court erred in refusing to dismiss the petition because of prejudicial pre-arrest delay, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a finding of guilty. Upon consideration of the arguments presented and after review of the record we find no error and affirm the judgment.

Appellant was arrested slightly more than three months after the commission of the offense with which he was charged. He contends that this delay was the result of a lack of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Howard Ross v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1965
  3. David M. Robinson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  4. United States v. Lawrence ParishCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  5. Townsley v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Christian v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. In re J.C.M.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. In Re MMJDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API