UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
SHERWOOD ANDREW WRIGHT, APPELLANT

8th Cir. | 1970-06-30
No. 19728
Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, Chief Judge, JOHNSEN, Senior Circuit Judge, and HEANEY, Circuit Judge.
428 F.2d 445 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the jury verdict was supported by substantial evidence and the conviction should be affirmed.


Facts & Procedural History

Defendant was convicted of possessing stolen Scotch whiskey moving in interstate commerce. He appealed, arguing the verdict was against the weight of …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is a timely appeal by defendant Sherwood Andrew Wright from his conviction by a jury upon an information charging him with unlawfully, willfully and knowingly having in his possession eight cases of Scotch whiskey valued at over $100 which had been unlawfully stolen while moving in interstate commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 659. Defendant was sentenced to two-years imprisonment. Defendant is represented by privately retained counsel.

The Government on May 21, 1970, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as frivolous, filing a memorandum in support of the motion. While the appeal could possibly be considered frivolous, we have chosen to deny the motion. We have considered the appeal upon the merits and have treated the memorandum in support of the motion as appellee’s brief.

The errors relied upon for reversal are thus stated:

(1) The verdict was against the weight of the evidence.

(2) The trial court erred in overruling defendant’s timely motions for acquittal based upon the insufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction.

This court as an appellate court does not try cases de novo and does not determine the weight of the evidence. It is for the fact finder, here the jury, to determine 'the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence. See United States v. May, 8 Cir., 419 F. 2d 553, 554-555. The jury by its verdict has properly performed its function in this respect.

Defendant’s motion for acquittal raises the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the guilty verdict. Upon appeal, this court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing in the jury trial, here the Government. A careful examination of all the evidence completely satisfies us that the verdict is supported by substantial evidence with respect to each element of the offense charged.

The judgment is affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw