United States v. Maynard Joe Marlow

Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I, and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F.2d 526, Part I.

The appellant was indicted for the obstruction of correspondence in violation of Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1702, tried to a jury and was found guilty. This appeal is from the five year confinement…