LEROY WILSON, APPELLANT
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the conviction based on the conviction obtained on Count 1, despite potential issues with Count 2.
Police searched an apartment under a warrant and found the appellant hiding with heroin. The appellant allegedly confessed ownership of the apartment …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Charge cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a narcotics ease. Police officers with a search warrant searched an apartment and found appellant there cowering in a state of undress under some clothes in a closet. They found a key to the apartment in his clothes, a hat belonging to him in a hatbox, and in the same box a considerable quantity of heroin. Officers testified that when they sought the address of the nominal lessee of the place appellant told them not to proceed further in that direction as the apartment was his (appellant’s) and the narcotics were also his. On the witness stand appellant denied making any such statements. He was convicted on two counts. On appeal he complains of the trial judge’s charge to the jury.
We have carefully considered the contentions advanced by able and conscientious court-appointed counsel. The principal impact of these contentions is on Count 2 of the indictment. But the sentences on Counts 1 and 2 are concurrent. We have no doubt as to the propriety of the conviction obtained on Count 1 and rest our decision on that count.1
Affirmed.
. Hirabayashi v. United States, 1943, 320 U.S. 81, 63 S.Ct. 1375, 87 L.Ed. 1774.