EMILE J. DAIGLE, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was indicted in eight counts. The alleged offenses involved two transactions. As to each transaction the indictment charged, in successive counts, (1) embezzlement, (2) larceny, (3) forgery of a check, and (4) uttering of a forged check. He was convicted on the first count and given a sentence of imprisonment, which was suspended.
Appellant urges error in the failure of the court to require the prosecution to elect as to counts, in the denial of motions for judgment of acquittal,1 in the court’s instructions to the jury, in the return by the jury of an inconsistent and antagonistic verdict, and in the court’s action in receiving a verdict of guilty on one count and directing a verdict of not guilty on another count. We have carefully considered the contentions, pressed upon us vigorously by counsel, but we find no error affecting substantial rights of the appellant.
Affirmed.
. See United States v. Daigle, 149 F.Supp. 409 (D.C.1957).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (U.S. 1984)
-
United States v. Howard, 507 F.2d 559 (8th Cir. 1974)
-
Helms v. United States, 310 F.2d 236 (5th Cir. 1962)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence