Francis E. Jackson v. United States

Appellant was convicted on three counts of violation of narcotics laws; three concurrent sentences were imposed. At trial the principal defense was that appellant was not guilty by reason of insanity. Various errors in the conduct of the trial are asserted and we find that they are without merit save as to one contention, i. e., the claim of undue intervention in the trial by the judge in a manner prejudicial to the defendant.

The appellant’s brief of necessity takes utterances and questions of the trial judge out of context and there is no way to evaluate his claims of undue and prejudicial…