Gary v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceNebeker, Associate Judge
I concur in the result the majority reaches in deciding the cases. I do not, however, join the majority’s holding in Part Y of the opinion, on the question of severability. It is unnecessary to decide the issue. In addition, I must express my concern that the majority, in affirming the convictions of Gary, Cole, and Pee, has subordinated the relevant facts of each case to the perceived critical — and political — issues. On the corroboration issue presented by Gary, I also concur in our holding that an instruction was not required. I do not agree with wandering beyond that issue by announcing…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited57 opinions
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Bolling v. SharpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. ChadhaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.